And you mean by "purely secular" what? Thank you. JL
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com Recovering Republican "Accursed is that peace of which revolt from God is the bond, and blessed are those contentions by which it is necessary to maintain the kingdom of Christ." -- John Calvin. -----Original Message----- From: Volokh, Eugene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> Sent: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:13 pm Subject: RE: LOFTON / Re: From the list custodian ??? I don't insist that people speak in thousands of words -- but in my experience, "pithy" one-liners rarely tell us much, and beyond that, most law professors who specialize in the field have heard pretty much all the pithy one-liners before.? We've heard that church and state should be separate, and we know how many different interpretations there are of that.? We've heard that all government is "religious" under certain sufficiently broad definitions of "religion," but that doesn't really tell us what government actions with regard to religion are permissible. ? ??? Now I know that some people disagree, and find such generalities more helpful than I do.? And naturally, different list operators may have different views on the subject.? But, on this list,?I hope you'd be good enough to accommodate my preferences on this score. ? ??? Eugene From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JOHN LOFTON Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 4:56 PM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: LOFTON / Re: From the list custodian There's no such thing as a "purely secular" government. And do you have software that automatically gripes about whatever I say? Every time I post something that's pithy, to the point, packed with wisdom, and?with no bloviating, you complain. And my most recent statement, and the one that begins this post, is designed precisely to "foster concrete discussion." I realize why many lawyers believe that something, in order to make sense, must be said in thousands of words, but I disagree. Am I allowed to disagree? Perhaps we might begin a "concrete discussion", Mr. List Custodian, with? you saying what you mean by "purely secular." Or we might?even discuss what constitutes a "concrete discussion." Thank you. John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com Recovering Republican "Accursed is that peace of which revolt from God is the bond, and blessed are those contentions by which it is necessary to maintain the kingdom of Christ." -- John Calvin. -----Original Message----- From: Volokh, Eugene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> Sent: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 5:50 pm Subject: From the list custodian ??? Folks:? Let me mention again that list discussion tends to be most helpful when it goes into concrete and detailed analysis, and not cliche generalities. ? ??? Recall that the thread began with a post discussing what protection should be offered to speech that's critical of religion.? I'm pretty sure that generalities about "government and religion should [be kept separate]" or "all government is religious" are not that helpful here; at that level of abstraction, those generalities tell us very little about how particular speech restrictions should be treated.? ? ??? For instance, even a purely secular government might choose to ban certain statements about religious groups, alongside certain statements about races, sexual orientations, and the like, because of a concern that such statements might cause violent reactions by their targets, might incite violence against their targets, or might simply cause unjustified emotional distress to their targets.? I oppose such restrictions, but I can't defend that opposition through generalities such as separation of church and state.? Conversely, even a religiously-based government might well decide not to ban speach critical of various religions. ? ??? More broadly, please note that the main purpose of this list is to foster concrete discussion -- discussion useful to legal academics -- on technical legal questions related to the law of government and religion.? ? ??? Eugene From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JOHN LOFTON Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:38 PM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: LOFTON / Re: Defamation of Religion ALL government is "religious." The only question is: Which "religion" will a government be based on. John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com Recovering Republican "Accursed is that peace of which revolt from God is the bond, and blessed are those contentions by which it is necessary to maintain the kingdom of Christ." -- John Calvin. -----Original Message----- From: CAROL MOORE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Sent: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 5:34 pm Subject: RE: Defamation of Religion And if this discussion doesn't make one want to dig up James Madison and kiss his molding corpse for penning "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion..." I don't know what would. With all due respect to those who profess belief, government and religion should have separate bedrooms, if not separate houses, with no conjugal visits. This trend puts Nixon's domino theory in a new light. Carol Moore Gentle Reader _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser. Get the TMZ Toolbar Now! _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser. Get the TMZ Toolbar Now! _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
