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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (217919)	2/12/2007 12:09:49 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"This is a support of the status quo, rather than a support of religion. If, for example, the child was attending no church, and an evangelical mother suddenly wanted the child to go to Christian school, the court would have a problem with that. That does not make the court against religion (or for it, in the other case)- it merely makes it a bureaucracy charged with trying to secure the stability of the child." So we have precedent for the courts to rule in favor of religious culture in cases where that is a factor. Going to church, after all, is more than simply a time commitment, it is supporting the teaching of moral rights and wrongs according to church dogma... which may be, and often are, a challenge to government authorities and mainstream mores. Even though gambling is legal (right), a church says it is a sin and not to do it (wrong). Entanglement not seeming to me as far fetched as the green thing.