RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

At 02:32 PM 7/25/08 -0700, you wrote: >I think there is a lot of merit in what both Chris and Eugene are saying. >It is hard to evaluate the political divisiveness issue without including >some kind of temporal reference. It took a moment to realize that you meant "with reference to time". O

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

If Professor Lund said, "someone in the government (whether the courts or otherwise) will have to decide what gets said and who gets to say it," then if logically the more powerful half of government gets to dictate and limit the content of religious speech by the lesser half of the government.

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

Law & Religion issues for Law Academics' Subject: RE: "Political divisions along religious lines" Either religious or sacreligious. Either meant to be taken literally and seriously, or meant to invoke God's name in vain. But the Court will never be absolutist about this, and

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

** > Daniel O. Conkle > Robert H. McKinney Professor of Law > Indiana University School of Law > Bloomington, Indiana 47405 > (812) 855-4331 > fax (812) 855-0555 > e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** > > > > --

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Lund Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 4:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: RE: "Political divisions along religious lines" It's true that the batt

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

I think there is a lot of merit in what both Chris and Eugene are saying. It is hard to evaluate the political divisiveness issue without including some kind of temporal reference. Restrictions on the exercise of majority prerogatives in the name of minority rights will often produce a substanti

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

* -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Lund Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 4:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: RE: "Political divisions along religious lines" It's tru

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

Christopher Lund > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 10:26 AM > To: Volokh, Eugene; religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > Subject: Re: "Political divisions along religious lines" > > I agree with this, but your account only talks about the > divisions caused by the first decision.

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

d > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 10:26 AM > To: Volokh, Eugene; religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > Subject: Re: "Political divisions along religious lines" > > I agree with this, but your account only talks about the > divisions caused by the first decision. Striking down

RE: "Political divisions along religious lines"

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: Re: "Political divisions along religious lines" I agree with this, but your account only talks about the divisions caused by the first decision. Striking down legislative prayer would indeed be controversial, more so than approv

Re: "Political divisions along religious lines"

I agree with this, but your account only talks about the divisions caused by the first decision. Striking down legislative prayer would indeed be controversial, more so than approving it. I think that may be part of why Marsh took the road it did. But, as we've seen, approving legislative prayer