Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (45910)	3/31/2002 8:40:55 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

edited

To: The Philosopher who wrote (45910)	4/1/2002 9:49:38 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I wouldn't expect you to view it as a problem. You view it from a completely different mindset. The Noel sign won't lack for private places to be placed, and there is absolutely no need to violate the constitution simply because some people don't see it as a problem. Private bodies can post all sorts of things on public property that don't violate the constitution- so what is your point? Because the government gets entangled with things that are not prohibited by the constitution it should get entangled with things that are? That seems to be your point. It isn't convincing. Should a church group be allowed to use a public park? Not for a tent revival. But if they just show up like ordinary citizens to eat hot dogs and swing on the swings, yes. It all depends on the function of the event, and the religious nature and the scope. Your funeral notices are open to all (I assume) and are therefore more like a display board for all religions. Plus their primary reason for existence is not to encourage religion, but to let people know about deaths. Again, scope and purpose make this a pretty easy case for me.