Comments on: Judge Rules Library Must Allow Religious Services

By: NotSoFast

NotSoFast — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:46:36 +0000

Must be unintentional irony.

By: Religious Magnet

Religious Magnet — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:34:01 +0000

Religious Magnet…

We link our site to this blog – for the impotent information that it gives….

By: Jason

Jason — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:11:14 +0000

Another thing that really pisses me off is when people use religion as an excuse to humiliate and rob people of their civil liberties. For example, the use of religion to deny people the right to marry based on their sexual preference. If a dude wants to slob another, so what? If he wants to marry another due, let him. They’re not hurting anyone. To use a book, such as the bible, to deny people their rights as pure bullshit. Who gives a damn if they’re the same sex. Let them be as miserable as the rest of us. Another motherfucker that pisses me is that piece of shit Christ and his trusty sidekick – the Prophet Mohammed. If those 2 bastards were taken out at an early age, then none of the bullshit Humanity has put up for 2 millenium would have never happened. People who use religion as an excuse to behead, torture, and rape others who don’t have those beliefs are a bunch of pussies who need to be shot on site. It’s called “Thinning the Herd”.

By: Jason

Jason — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:00:09 +0000

It’s pretty insulting to Humanity and anyone with common sense that something like this happened. It’s especially insulting when people use a library to have their prayer services. Our tax dollars pay to keep federal buildings, like libraries, open for the public to use for research, for children to learn, and for anyone else who use libraries. If they want to practice their religion, they need to find a place of their own to do it. Stop wasting tax dollars. If you want to pray to a god, do it on your own watch. Not ours.

By: Show Me Some PROOF

Show Me Some PROOF — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:44:15 +0000

The key there is LIBRARY OFFICIALS not determining what is or is not religious. Legislators should be all over it. Not trying to split hairs, and I see how legislators could be seen as entangling as well based on that view- I was just stating how the court justified its decision.

By: Janus Grayden

Janus Grayden — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:28:17 +0000

Granted, but how is it entanglement to say that something isn’t a religious service? That’s absurd.

If that was the case, how could a definitive Separation of Church and State even exist? If public officials can’t determine what is or isn’t religious service, then I should claim that my entire life is my free expression of my religious beliefs. Everything I purchase would be a tax write-off and who are they to tell me it’s not? I’ll sue them for being entangled in religious affairs.

That’s an extreme example, but appropriate. Of course public officials have the right to determine what constitutes religious service. That’s the only possible way for it to be enforced.

There’s absolutely no grounds for the church to claim they were being discriminated against. That clearly was not the case.

By: NotSoFast

NotSoFast — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 21:34:54 +0000

The library board could undoubtedly exclude these services for just that reason. I have no idea why they’re not doing it.

By: Bill Helfrich

Bill Helfrich — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:55:05 +0000

Isn’t a library suppose to be quiet? The church services and religious get togethers I have seen are anything but quiet.

By: what

what — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:25:23 +0000

Calling their activity “Bible Study” instead of a “religious service” is nothing but attaching different words to the same behavior. The judge should be removed from his post for bending to such stupidity.

By: NotSoFast

NotSoFast — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:02:59 +0000

Go here and click on the link "9th Circuit" to download the PDF text of the decision.