For all those claiming that it is illegal, please read the Supreme Court's opinions (majority, concurring, and dissenting) in Van Orden v. Perry. Particularly that of Stephen Breyer.
This precise display was the subject of a case and ruling by U.S. District Court Hudspeth in 2002; he ruled it served a sufficient secular purpose to remain. Curiously enough, the display dates from a publicity campaign for the movie "The 10 Commandments"
Makes me sick. What - the fuck - is that doing outside a government building? Not exactly a world away from any two-bit Islamic republic. What d'you think Danman, does the Christian right's infamous Australian friend, allow us to consider it a banana republic instead?
For all those claiming that it is illegal, please read the Supreme Court's opinions (majority, concurring, and dissenting) in Van Orden v. Perry. Particularly that of Stephen Breyer.
IfIonliHadAName 4 months ago
This precise display was the subject of a case and ruling by U.S. District Court Hudspeth in 2002; he ruled it served a sufficient secular purpose to remain. Curiously enough, the display dates from a publicity campaign for the movie "The 10 Commandments"
a1b1c2d352 5 months ago
why hasn't the ACLUTX done anything about this? .. it's clearly illegal
SanguineBullet667 7 months ago
Makes me sick. What - the fuck - is that doing outside a government building? Not exactly a world away from any two-bit Islamic republic. What d'you think Danman, does the Christian right's infamous Australian friend, allow us to consider it a banana republic instead?
PurushaDesa 2 years ago