It shouldn’t be a problem to overturn this, but the fact that there are judges in office who are willing to do this…
*sighs*
What’s even worse is the minute the religious right hears about this, you know they’re going to be claiming that overturning this is infringing their rights and their freedoms, and that they’re oh so put upon, and oh look how they’re persecuted for their beliefs.
yeah, how does that work anyway, how can a persecuted people have a stranglehold on the government? i’ve never heard a group of people crow so much about “their rights” when they all they want to do is pass legislation limiting the rights of others
i’m sure it will come down to the fact that the judge’s descision is unconstitutional, its just a matter of time. i hope that this gets bigger media attention actually.
Well, what infuriates me even more, is that the judge decided that the “proper” religion was the religion being taught at SCHOOL.
In effect, he was taking the parents ability to raise their own child out of their own hands. With the lack of responsibility that we have these days already, the last thing we need is for the courts to be telling us that the parents don’t have the right to raise the child as they want to, and as they see fit.
What next, parents not being able to teach their kids about birth control, because it “conflicts” with the curriculum taught at school about abstinence?
Christianity has a history and record of enduring persecution from Roman times. It’s not unusual to find Christian teachings which insist that, if you are not being persecuted for being a Christian, you must be doing it wrong.
“I celebrate life as a duality. There’s a male and female force to everything,” Jones said. “I feel the Earth is a living creature. I don’t believe in Satan or any creature of infinite evil.”
Maybe, Judge Bradford has finally changed Jones’ mind on that last point.
Doesn’t your constitution have an “establishment clause” preventing that sorta thing? Heck, it’s even in a civil matter AGAINST the wishes of both parties.
Sheesh.
— Steve’s wondering why that bureau-guy is afraid to let the kid make up his own mind.
Tricksy the Establishment Clause is… Always changing.
The Establishment Clause probably will be used on appeal, though technically there’s no legislative action here, nor any express preference of one religion over another. In fact, the judge’s ruling could be interpreted to require the divorced parents to raise their child as an atheist…
Yah, I’m no lawyer or constitutional scholar, but as far as I know one of the main purposes of this country being populated in the first place was the opportunity to get away from being told which religions you could and couldn’t practice. I had yet to be informed that this had changed.
Things like this unfotunately do happen. weephun happens to belong to a religion whose people were persecuted, killed, and driven from entire states in this great freedom-of-religion country. Somehow stupidity and bigotry always manage to rear their ugly heads every once in a while no matter how hard you try to beat them down.
as far as I know one of the main purposes of this country being populated in the first place was the opportunity to get away from being told which religions you could and couldn’t practice.
Well, those of us with Irish heritage are a little suspicious of the offical line regarding the Puritans’ motives for settling in America… after all, it was professed Puritans doing the persecuting until Cromwell died and the Protectorate folded. Their track record in the early years of Plymouth Rock wasn’t so hot in the civil rights and religious freedom departments either.
However, later generations did refine the concept a little and things got much better for those not on the bully-pulpit. And the later constitution drafted by the new republic was a great leap forward.
— Steve’s hoping that America remembers its roots… but doesn’t want it to necessarily return to them.
yeah, i once heard a standup comedian talk about the Puritans, and how we learn in school how great they were for fleeing “religious persecution” when in reality it was more like:
“oh what’s that? restrictive dogma? yeah, no… uh, go to America, see how that works out for ya, we’re kinda busy having the Rennaisance over here…”
yes, i know its incredibly simplified, but still funny
Don’t tell me you don’t want to see him, ’cause I know that you do!
The
Marion Superior Court is overseen by a three-member, judicially
elected presiding committee with one presiding judge.
Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson (left); Hon. Cale Bradford
(seated);
and Hon. Robyn L. Moberly (right),
were chosen by their peers as the court’s Executive Committee.
Judge Bradford was re-elected
to this committee and re-elected as presiding judge.
The current term of
the new Executive Committee will conclude at the end of 2006.
You think if they are going to take your picture you would clean off your desk….and i will fight the urge to down load pic and add labels….must … focus … on work….
I’ll get overturned. But hopefully it’ll go all the way to SCOTUS, so it can get LOTS of publicity. And Mr. Jones and his son can be forever remembered, and learned about, in ConLaw classes everywhere.
I’m more worried about the harm that judge may be doing in more legally questionable cases — this one seems pretty cut-and-dried, so he won’t be able to get away with it.
gah. stupidity. Amazing people think they can do this.
Obviously they think they can… and they do.
It shouldn’t be a problem to overturn this, but the fact that there are judges in office who are willing to do this…
*sighs*
What’s even worse is the minute the religious right hears about this, you know they’re going to be claiming that overturning this is infringing their rights and their freedoms, and that they’re oh so put upon, and oh look how they’re persecuted for their beliefs.
yeah, how does that work anyway, how can a persecuted people have a stranglehold on the government? i’ve never heard a group of people crow so much about “their rights” when they all they want to do is pass legislation limiting the rights of others
i’m sure it will come down to the fact that the judge’s descision is unconstitutional, its just a matter of time. i hope that this gets bigger media attention actually.
Well, what infuriates me even more, is that the judge decided that the “proper” religion was the religion being taught at SCHOOL.
In effect, he was taking the parents ability to raise their own child out of their own hands. With the lack of responsibility that we have these days already, the last thing we need is for the courts to be telling us that the parents don’t have the right to raise the child as they want to, and as they see fit.
What next, parents not being able to teach their kids about birth control, because it “conflicts” with the curriculum taught at school about abstinence?
Christianity has a history and record of enduring persecution from Roman times. It’s not unusual to find Christian teachings which insist that, if you are not being persecuted for being a Christian, you must be doing it wrong.
WTF?
*stabby stabby stabby*
Much better.
On the bright side, after this ruling, the judge may be nominated to the federal bench, where he won’t preside over any more divorces.
Maybe, Judge Bradford has finally changed Jones’ mind on that last point.
Preach it, brother.
And… what exactly *ARE* pagan beliefs again?
Aaaaggghhh! Don’t you persecute me and my ill-defined belief system!
Well yes, up ta now that’s about 100% of my understanding of Pagan beliefs. Thank you for reaffirming that, Mr. Foot.
Doesn’t your constitution have an “establishment clause” preventing that sorta thing? Heck, it’s even in a civil matter AGAINST the wishes of both parties.
Sheesh.
— Steve’s wondering why that bureau-guy is afraid to let the kid make up his own mind.
Tricksy the Establishment Clause is… Always changing.
The Establishment Clause probably will be used on appeal, though technically there’s no legislative action here, nor any express preference of one religion over another. In fact, the judge’s ruling could be interpreted to require the divorced parents to raise their child as an atheist…
Yah, I’m no lawyer or constitutional scholar, but as far as I know one of the main purposes of this country being populated in the first place was the opportunity to get away from being told which religions you could and couldn’t practice. I had yet to be informed that this had changed.
Things like this unfotunately do happen. weephun happens to belong to a religion whose people were persecuted, killed, and driven from entire states in this great freedom-of-religion country. Somehow stupidity and bigotry always manage to rear their ugly heads every once in a while no matter how hard you try to beat them down.
as far as I know one of the main purposes of this country being populated in the first place was the opportunity to get away from being told which religions you could and couldn’t practice.
Well, those of us with Irish heritage are a little suspicious of the offical line regarding the Puritans’ motives for settling in America… after all, it was professed Puritans doing the persecuting until Cromwell died and the Protectorate folded. Their track record in the early years of Plymouth Rock wasn’t so hot in the civil rights and religious freedom departments either.
However, later generations did refine the concept a little and things got much better for those not on the bully-pulpit. And the later constitution drafted by the new republic was a great leap forward.
— Steve’s hoping that America remembers its roots… but doesn’t want it to necessarily return to them.
yeah, i once heard a standup comedian talk about the Puritans, and how we learn in school how great they were for fleeing “religious persecution” when in reality it was more like:
“oh what’s that? restrictive dogma? yeah, no… uh, go to America, see how that works out for ya, we’re kinda busy having the Rennaisance over here…”
yes, i know its incredibly simplified, but still funny
Well just because we want religious freedom or [insert other freedom here] doesn’t mean we have to give it to other people … right? [end sarcasm]
Don’t tell me you don’t want to see him, ’cause I know that you do!
The
Marion Superior Court is overseen by a three-member, judicially
elected presiding committee with one presiding judge.
Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson (left);
Hon. Cale Bradford
(seated);
and Hon. Robyn L. Moberly (right),
were chosen by their peers as the court’s Executive Committee.
Judge Bradford was re-elected
to this committee and re-elected as presiding judge.
The current term of
the new Executive Committee will conclude at the end of 2006.
Creeeepy.
Good gravy did that picture scare me.
What are those, his women in waiting?
Did anyone stop to ask the KID what HE wanted to worship?
!seek freedom
!splotch
evade evade evade
!seek canada
!reveal maple syrup
!behold teh yummy
hmm, i wonder if the judge would object to us teaching our kids Flea-ism
And gmail’s related sponsored links:
Squash Recipes
Eat Olive Garden Get Paid
Eat Olive Garden Get Paid
Do I have to eat the whole garden, or just what’s ripe at the time?
— Steve knows that contracts are made or broken by the details.
!behold flea++
!seek truth
!behold truth
!reveal truth
that is the law and the whole of the law
You think if they are going to take your picture you would clean off your desk….and i will fight the urge to down load pic and add labels….must … focus … on work….
Oh, heck no. Nobody in a vaguely political office should EVER have a photo taken with a clean desk.
“Quick, the photographer’s coming! Everybody look busy!”
— Steve knows they’ve gotta show the public that they’re working, or the public will start to wonder why they’re there…
He didn’t clear his desk because those are his bible study notes. Don’t you know anything?
Don’t worry about it.
I’ll get overturned. But hopefully it’ll go all the way to SCOTUS, so it can get LOTS of publicity. And Mr. Jones and his son can be forever remembered, and learned about, in ConLaw classes everywhere.
I’m more worried about the harm that judge may be doing in more legally questionable cases — this one seems pretty cut-and-dried, so he won’t be able to get away with it.
Unless of of course some nutcase majority leader doesn’t say anything….
that’s such crap…i hate this stupid country.
What the fucking fuck? On the upside, that’s something so obviously ridiculous that it’ll be overturned pretty easily….