Thomas spanks court on religious displays

[rug]

Published: Nov. 6, 2011 at 5:30 AM
By MICHAEL KIRKLAND

WASHINGTON, Nov. 6 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court turned its collective face from two linked cases last week, rejecting them without comment other than a blistering dissent from Justice Clarence Thomas, who caustically told the rest of the justices their guidance in religious display cases was a mess.

"Today the Court rejects an opportunity to provide clarity to an establishment clause jurisprudence in shambles," Thomas said in the dissent handed down last Monday. "A sharply divided Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit has declared unconstitutional a private association's efforts to memorialize slain police officers with white roadside crosses, holding that the crosses convey to a reasonable observer that the state of Utah is endorsing Christianity. The 10th Circuit's opinion is one of the latest in a long line of 'religious display' decisions that, because of this court's nebulous establishment clause analyses, turn on little more than 'judicial predilections.'"

The establishment clause of the First Amendment, of course, says Congress -- or in the modern sense all government -- "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Thomas said in his lonely dissent he would grant review of the cases because "our jurisprudence has confounded the lower courts and rendered the constitutionality of displays of religious imagery on government property anyone's guess."

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/11/06/Under-the-US-Supreme-Court-Thomas-spanks-court-on-religious-displays/UPI-80331320575400/?spt=hs&or=tn

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. He has very good point

The cases are all over the map and some well structured guidance is long overdue. That said, I am not sure if Thomas wrote the guidance I would like what it said.

[rug]

2. Agreed.

The same can be said for their Fourth Amendment cases.

[Deep13]

9. True. nt

[humblebum]

3. The ironic thing about the Utah case is that Mormonism discourages

the display of crosses, and yet it is being said that Utah is attempting to establish religion. Go figure.

[cleanhippie]

4. Since when has religion ever been consistent?

Or yourself, for that matter?


Just one example, humblebum. Just one example of knowledge gained through some "other way of knowing". Just one.


:rofl:

[humblebum]

5. Well probably in its opposition to atheism. NT

[cleanhippie]

6. Not even then.

Especially since the definition of atheism is conveniently changed to fit the narrative.




Just one example, bum. Just one.

And you can't do it.

[Jackpine Radical]

7. Isn't Bishop Spong an atheist?

[LeftishBrit]

8. Actually, no

I know lots of religious people - Jews, Christians and Muslims - and while their views are generally in disagreement with atheism, most of them are not nearly as preoccupied as you are with worrying about the existence and characteristics of atheists! Moreover, among all these religions, there are plenty of people who have no strong belief in a God, but identify with the religion as a matter of *cultural* tradition. This is particularly common among ethnic Jews, but is also not uncommon among British nominal Christians.

Also, some religions do not require a God or Gods, but involve a much more abstract form of spirituality: e.g. Buddhism.

I would say that the biggest thing that different religions have in common is a belief that everything has a cause, and that many things have a supernatural cause. Even that may be an overgeneralization, however: many people have worshipped natural objects, notably the Sun.

[humblebum]

10. I agree with your statement:

"I would say that the biggest thing that different religions have in common is a belief that everything has a cause." But if there ever was a defining case in the culture war between atheists and believers, this is probably it according to conversations I've had. A symbolic line has been crossed when it comes to honoring the dead. And it certainly isn't religion being seen as the bad guy here. Organized atheism needs to know when to draw the line. This defines the intent of organized atheism in the eyes of many, and it should. And that is sad.

[LeftishBrit]

11. I am glad to say...

that most of the religious people whom I know are not that obsessed with atheism, organized or otherwise.

[MarkCharles]

12. "Thomas spanks" very insightful

his religious or legal views, or his views on sex?

Not quite sure which.

Very funny that a man of the robes has opinions on men and women of the cloth.

But he spanks. Probably nude.

[struggle4progress]

13. Seems the Moonies at UPI are as upset as Thomas is: he certainly wrote lots and lots

of words (19 pages), by his little old lonesome, to protest SCOTUS not hearing the appeal

If you want to read Thomas's tantrum and supporting blather, here's a link:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=10-1276

I'd guess the rest of SCOTUS thinks Thomas is wandering somewhere out in the Oort Cloud on this one