Achilles Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 Which of course begs the question, what was the reference doing there in the first place? Link to the full story From the plaintiffs: "It is one of the most egregiously and breathtakingly unconstitutional actions by a state legislature that I've ever seen," said Edwin F. Kagin, national legal director of Parsippany, N.J.-based American Atheists Inc. The group claims the law violates both the state and U.S. constitutions. From the defendants: "No government by itself can guarantee perfect security," Riner said. "There will always be this opposition to the acknowledgment of divine providence, but this is a foundational understanding of what America is." My favorite part: "I'm not aware of any other state or commonwealth that is attempting to dump their clear responsibility for protecting their citizens onto God or any other mythological creature," [Ed] Buckner [President of American Atheists] said.
Arcesious Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 Police: "Our favorite sky-daddy will protect us!" Atheist: "Ah crap not this again."
Achilles Posted December 5, 2008 Author Posted December 5, 2008 Because we're a nation of laws. Laws are established, modified, etc, via the legal system.
Rogue15 Posted December 5, 2008 Posted December 5, 2008 it's stupid though. money isn't everything. if they won the lawsuit, would it give them money, or kick god out of kentucky homeland security law? or both? i think it should be one or the other..
Achilles Posted December 5, 2008 Author Posted December 5, 2008 it's stupid though. money isn't everything. People only sue for money? if they won the lawsuit, would it give them money, or kick god out of kentucky homeland security law? or both? i think it should be one or the other..Who mentioned anything about money?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.