http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/111005HaynesOnAlito.html
[excerpt]
Inside the First Amendment
Inside the First Amendment - Alito Is Religion-Friendly, But How Far Will
He Go?
By Charles C. Haynes
First Amendment Center
Predicting how Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito will rule on
religious-freedom cases is like reading tea leaves: Everyone sees the
message he wants to see at the bottom of the cup.
As the confirmation battle heats up, the Alito tea leaves under close
scrutiny are his opinions in nine cases involving religion decided during
his 15 years on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Not surprisingly,
people on both sides have read their hopes and fears into every word Alito
ever wrote.
On the right, Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice tells
Pat Robertson in an interview on the Christian Broadcasting Network that
Alito has "consistently ruled in our favor." This nomination, says Sekulow,
is a "grand slam" for conservative Christians.
Meanwhile on the left, Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of
Church and State reads the same opinions and sees disaster for the First
Amendment. "The country deserves a Supreme Court justice who will protect
the rights of all Americans," says Lynn, "not kowtow to the demands of the
Religious Right."
Partisans on both sides peer at Alito's opinions and see the same thing: If
elevated to the Supreme Court, he will work to lower the wall between
church and state, replacing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's swing vote with
one far more likely to mix religion and government on such issues as
erecting holiday displays or funding social services provided by religious
groups.
This portrayal of Alito is scary for some, exhilarating for others. But is
it accurate? A close look at what Judge Alito actually wrote in the nine
cases suggests that on key church-state issues he is mostly an unknown
quantity. Let's look at what we know - and don't know.
[end of excerpt]
*****************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the U.S. and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
