China Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 Sect sues, asks equal space for 'Aphorisms' Followers of the Summum faith say Moses made two trips down from the mountain. On one journey, the prophet returned with the Ten Commandments, "lower laws" that were easily understood and widely distributed. The higher law obtained from the other trip, though, was passed down only to a select few who were able to appreciate it, according to the Salt Lake City-based religion. But now, Summum is fighting a legal battle to share that higher law - the Seven Aphorisms, or principles that underlie creation and nature - with everyone in a public forum. The church has filed suit against Pleasant Grove over its refusal to allow it to erect its own monument in a city park that has held a Ten Commandments monolith since 1971. In the lawsuit, Summum alleges the denial of its request to put up the Seven Aphorisms in the park at 100 North and 100 East counters previous rulings. In two of them, handed down in 1997 and 2002, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver agreed that Salt Lake County and Ogden City had created a forum for free expression by allowing the erection of a Ten Commandments monument on government property. The same standard applies to Pleasant Grove, Summum contends in its suit, filed Friday in U.S. District Court. "The rights of plaintiff Summum are violated when the defendants give preference and endorsement to one particular set of religious beliefs by allowing the Ten Commandments monument to remain in a public park or in a forum within the public park supported by taxpayers and disallow a similar display of the religious tenets of Summum," the suit says. Brian Barnard, a Salt Lake City attorney for Summum, said a June ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court also supports the church's position. In a Texas case, the high court said a Ten Commandments monument could remain on the grounds of the state capitol because it was put up as part of a bigger historical display. Pleasant Grove officials did not return calls Tuesday seeking comment. That same U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Texas case has provided the latest twist in a separate suit against Pleasant Grove, this one filed in 2003 by the Society of Separationists that seeks to remove the Ten Commandments from the park. In a Monday decision, the 10th Circuit reversed a ruling by U.S. District Judge Bruce Jenkins that allowed the monolith to remain. The appeals court asked for additional information to help it analyze the case under the new Supreme Court analysis. Summum, founded in 1975, is based on Egyptian customs, and includes winemaking and mummification. It has no monuments on public property because Salt Lake County and Ogden removed their Ten Commandments monuments in response to the 10th Circuit rulings. --------------------------------------------------- "I give you these 17... Oy! these 10 commandments" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 You knew this was coming. How many times have us "lefties" been saying "you're gonna see a case where the Koran belongs in a courthouse too." I can't wait to hear the argument from the far right, this outta' be fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 1 - THE PRINCIPLE OF PSYCHOKINESIS 2 - THE PRINCIPLE OF CORRESPONDENCE 3 - THE PRINCIPLE OF VIBRATION 4 - THE PRINCIPLE OF OPPOSITION 5 - THE PRINCIPLE OF RHYTHM 6 - THE PRINCIPLE OF CAUSE AND EFFECT 7 - THE PRINCIPLE OF GENDER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 I got no problem with it: As long as they are given equal space based on size / time *and decorum is used for the young* Any wiccan that wants to dance naked has to be at least a 5.1 on the hottness scale.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Originally posted by Destino 1 - THE PRINCIPLE OF PSYCHOKINESIS 2 - THE PRINCIPLE OF CORRESPONDENCE 3 - THE PRINCIPLE OF VIBRATION 4 - THE PRINCIPLE OF OPPOSITION 5 - THE PRINCIPLE OF RHYTHM 6 - THE PRINCIPLE OF CAUSE AND EFFECT 7 - THE PRINCIPLE OF GENDER Can we make this thing class action? I wanna add a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Originally posted by Thiebear Any wiccan that wants to dance naked has to be at least a 5.1 on the hottness scale.. :laugh: 5.1?! :puke: At least a 7, man!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Originally posted by chomerics You knew this was coming. How many times have us "lefties" been saying "you're gonna see a case where the Koran belongs in a courthouse too." I can't wait to hear the argument from the far right, this outta' be fun I would have no problem with the display of any writings that were used to develop the rule of law....Now these seven are somewhat lacking in the concept of law:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Originally posted by twa I would have no problem with the display of any writings that were used to develop the rule of law....Now these seven are somewhat lacking in the concept of law:rolleyes: Oh, c'mon. Half of those, whatever they are, went into the First Law of Thermodynamics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Originally posted by Larry Oh, c'mon. Half of those, whatever they are, went into the First Law of Thermodynamics. Fine Then...Add them to science classes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 I've always been amazed that more niche religions don't go this route. Once you've opened the door it might be pretty hard to keep out the unwanted. A religion that includes winemaking? Tempting, but I'm holding out for one that makes a sacrament out of brewing beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackwolf Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Originally posted by JimboDaMan I've always been amazed that more niche religions don't go this route. Once you've opened the door it might be pretty hard to keep out the unwanted. A religion that includes winemaking? Tempting, but I'm holding out for one that makes a sacrament out of brewing beer. You're easily pleased. Personally, I'm waiting for a religion wherein Michael Vick is considered God. The holy trinity of the Michael, the Mexico, and the Momentum-Killing Interception. Until then, any prophets or door-to-door evangelists can shill their uncharismatic books elsewhere:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueTalon Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Originally posted by JimboDaMan I've always been amazed that more niche religions don't go this route. Once you've opened the door it might be pretty hard to keep out the unwanted. A religion that includes winemaking? Tempting, but I'm holding out for one that makes a sacrament out of brewing beer. How about a monument to a religion that combines beer brewing with naked dancing hotties (7.1 or better)? Regarding the article... in the Bible (don't freak!) there's an account of a place in Athens called Mars Hill, where basically anyone with a god and a message would go to spread the word. I wouldn't have a problem with a public forum like that where someone could post their seven hoo-yahs or whatever. My only stipulation is that it has to be tasteful, and fit the theme/decor of the spot that it's in. (Nothing too big or gaudy, nothing obscene, nothing advocating hate or killing, etc.) I'm all about open debate, and the more information the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 I have no issues with this. This country was founded in large part for freedom of religious expression. As long as the display is "tasteful" (however that is defined is another question), they have the right. The falacy is that Christians are seeking special status in this country above other relgions. The truth is we only want the protection that is guranteed under the Constitution and was intended by the founding fathers. And which should be extended to all religions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gichin13 Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Originally posted by stevenaa I have no issues with this. This country was founded in large part for freedom of religious expression. As long as the display is "tasteful" (however that is defined is another question), they have the right. The falacy is that Christians are seeking special status in this country above other relgions. The truth is we only want the protection that is guranteed under the Constitution and was intended by the founding fathers. And which should be extended to all religions. Stevenaa, I have read enough of your posts in the past to judge this one -- you maintain a high level of consistency and intellectual integrity in your posts. I think you entirely would stick to this consistent philosophy. The problem is, I firmly believe folks are trying to get "an edge" in pushing their message. Many of the same people pushing for 10 Commandments in courthouses also seem to be bashing Islamics as false idolators. That is part of why I lean towards keeping religion out of government, and out of the forms of expression that government fosters/funds/creates (statues, displays in courthouses, school prayer et c). Maybe I am too cynical in my view ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.