<i>Take and Bite <i>this</i>, in remembrance of the fact that not everybody believes the shit you do.</i> -- Jebus 69:1-33.</i>
My contention has always been that the &quot;che&quot; in Rochester should be pronounced like the &quot;ce&quot; in Leicester, or the &quot;ce&quot; in Worcester. Sadly, all my friends just called it Rottenchester rather than Rooster.
It&#039;s too bad we can&#039;t have some higher court to appeal these stupid &quot;Supreme&quot; court decisions to. Also, this Greece place sounds like a shithole.
Thank you Justice Kennedy, for the new judicial standard for Constitutional cases on Church-State questions: &quot;whatever many Americans believe.&quot;
Great. Now our &quot;swing&quot; Justice has apparently developed Alzheimers.
Let me explore the Rules for a moment.
1. I do not believe, at all, in the power of prayer. I do not think there is any entity out there to which one can pray. I recognize that my prayer, should I propose one, is totally devoid of consequences in the real world.
2. The Supreme Court has decided that prayer is permissible at public meetings, so I presume that it is also permissible in public comments. Or even in non-existent comments.
3. So, I think I may pray that Tony Scalia and Sam Alito should die, painlessly, within the next week, without violating the Rules. Because I am 100% certain that my prayer is pointless and will not be answered. It&#039;s not like I were <i>wishing</i>.
So there goes the <em>Lemon</em> test - it doesn&#039;t matter if the government endorses a religion, as long as they aren&#039;t coercive about it. And you can&#039;t challenge it unless there is a &quot;pattern&quot; of coercive behavior (which means that it&#039;s a good bet we&#039;ll be seeing prayers at public school graduation ceremonies again since that&#039;s a one-time thing, so bye-bye <em>Lee v. Weisman</em>).
You Turkey!
<i>Take and Bite <i>this</i>, in remembrance of the fact that not everybody believes the shit you do.</i> -- Jebus 69:1-33.</i>
My contention has always been that the &quot;che&quot; in Rochester should be pronounced like the &quot;ce&quot; in Leicester, or the &quot;ce&quot; in Worcester. Sadly, all my friends just called it Rottenchester rather than Rooster.
Waiting for this to be abused by the fundamentalists in 3...2...1.
It&#039;s too bad we can&#039;t have some higher court to appeal these stupid &quot;Supreme&quot; court decisions to. Also, this Greece place sounds like a shithole.
Thank you Justice Kennedy, for the new judicial standard for Constitutional cases on Church-State questions: &quot;whatever many Americans believe.&quot;
Intended, but taken much, much further than intended.
Apparently five of them favor it as long as it is American Christian sharia, which of course is Totally Different.
Great. Now our &quot;swing&quot; Justice has apparently developed Alzheimers.
Let me explore the Rules for a moment.
1. I do not believe, at all, in the power of prayer. I do not think there is any entity out there to which one can pray. I recognize that my prayer, should I propose one, is totally devoid of consequences in the real world.
2. The Supreme Court has decided that prayer is permissible at public meetings, so I presume that it is also permissible in public comments. Or even in non-existent comments.
3. So, I think I may pray that Tony Scalia and Sam Alito should die, painlessly, within the next week, without violating the Rules. Because I am 100% certain that my prayer is pointless and will not be answered. It&#039;s not like I were <i>wishing</i>.
and the Collection Plate , always the Collection Plate
We get more like the Taliban every day.
&quot;Today&#039;s prayer comes from the Book of Arnold&quot;.
&quot;Hail Hydra.&quot;
So there goes the <em>Lemon</em> test - it doesn&#039;t matter if the government endorses a religion, as long as they aren&#039;t coercive about it. And you can&#039;t challenge it unless there is a &quot;pattern&quot; of coercive behavior (which means that it&#039;s a good bet we&#039;ll be seeing prayers at public school graduation ceremonies again since that&#039;s a one-time thing, so bye-bye <em>Lee v. Weisman</em>).
<a href="http:\/\/www.geocities.com\/denniverse\/MAX\/bushprayverse.jpg" target="_blank"> This. </a>
Did Scalia at least argue with himself again?