Comments on: FFRF Loses major case in Supreme Court

By: punkskeptic

punkskeptic — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

goddamn… religion just continues to fuck up the country.

By: writerdd

writerdd — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Yes it is still breaking the law. This just goes to show why we cannot, under any circumstances, allow another Rethuglican president to be elected. We must get keep them from getting more reactionary idiots in the Supreme Court.

What we should do, in huge numbers, is stop paying our taxes. Fat chance, though, huh?

By: amyg113

amyg113 — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

This makes me sick to my stomach.

By: podry

podry — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Ughh!

By: tarma

tarma — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

This is certainly bad news - but, according to a statement by Lynn, at least this ruling only affects money from a White House discretionary fund being used to promote the faith-based initiative. Lynn said that it "is important to note that this ruling applies to only a few situations. Most church-state lawsuits, including those that challenge congressional appropriations for faith-based programs, will not be affected." I hope that is the case.

I agree completely that electing another Republican as President will further push the Supreme Court in this direction. As an Independent, I suppose I will be voting once again for the lesser of two weevils. I hate it.

By: evilatheistconquerer

evilatheistconquerer — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It’s not all bad today. A judge in another case ruled that some jackass can’t sue a dry cleaner for $54 million dollars because they lost his pants. At least someone has a little sense.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070625/ap_on_re_us/67_million_pants

By: emkay

emkay — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

But then, another SC decision today was against the young man and his ‘Bong Hits For Jeebus’ case about free speech. Sigh. Most of these conservative decisions are coming down 5-4, we all just have to ‘pray’ gawd will call home one or two of his fans from that side of the bench about the time a Dem prez is in house.

By: TXatheist

TXatheist — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I’m disturbed and this 5-4 thing is going to get old real quick. Here’s what bothers me. Example: Bush decides to give 5 million to the Jerry Falwell Liberty university program to help people overseas. Then Liberty university only spends 2 million on that, keeps 1 mill and kicks back a 2 million contribution to a political candidate, say Brownback or whomever Bush loves. All the money unaccounted for.

By: mdetrano

mdetrano — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I know a lot of folks out there actually try to say atheism is just another “religion”…soooo, maybe we can get some of this OFBCI funding for some of our community projects, to include prosetylizing on the values of atheism and rational thought. I can see it now, a big sign in the soup kitchen, “The Lord provideth not (obviously), but we are here to help…”

By: pnuhn@gampac.org

pnuhn@gampac.org — Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

TXatheist hits the nail right on the head. In addition, please notice that once again, US Supremes majority are all Catholic Conservatives. In addition, this ruling once again stands for the proposition that the only thing religious organizations are in the business of, is the business of making, getting, stealing, money through any means then can manage. Religious organizations are just another corporation whose only purpose for being is to enrich itself.

As for the 5-4 ruling, I purpose that each of you write your Congressman and Senators right this moment. State that this is an official petition for the representative or senators to pass legislation that no federal court in the country will consist of a majority of members at the bench who are of one particular religion.