Is this a Constitutional question?

[gsmittle]

Mods, if you deem this thread over the line on politics, religion, or both, feel free to nuke it.

I wonder about FL's train of thought here:
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/florida...938x1200023953

What I'm pondering is: Should there be a wall between church and state, and how high should it be? What about the rest of the First Amendment, specifically the Freedom of Speech clause?

I'll share my thoughts in a day or so. Suffice it to say, this is the kind of question that keeps me up at night.

To repeat, this thread is NOT meant as troll bait, nor is it to start a flame war. Instead, I feel this subject needs healthy, civil debate.

g.

[Uncle Cracker]

Those of us in FL have certainly seen our share of license plate promotion over the years. Apparently, the State has discovered it to be a major cash cow. First came the vanity plates (and the subsequent censorship thereof), and then the charity plates... just a couple at first, and then a torrent of them. There are some worthy charities, to be sure, but equally sure is that the State gets its cut first. One thing I have not figured out is that you pay extra to get the plates, and then pay extra every year until you go back to standard plates. I would think more people would involve themselves in it if you did not have to commit to a repetitive yearly donation. This is especially odd for the custom vanity plates, which support no charities, as the increased cost was explained as a way to offset the State's cost in making them. So why did we still have to pay extra every year for a plate with our initials (or whatever) when they only made the plate once? It's become a ridiculous nuisance, and I long for the days when you could tell from a distance what state a tag came from by just looking at it. The religious aspect is just taking the whole mess one step further, and maybe too far. There are ways to show pride in one's religion without paying the government to help you do it. Next thing on the agenda will be GM or Microsoft, or Delta airlines, or somebody else paying the State to add their trademark or slogan to our plates.

[Tequila]

The First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Obviously there's plenty of room for debate on what that means, but there's been recent activities that seem to imply that as long as you treat all religions equally, there's no problem. So if Florida wants to offer a Christian plate, they'd be required to offer similar plates for Jews, Muslims, Satanists, etc.

I'm not sure if the "treat everyone equally" idea has been tested in the Supreme Court though.

[paintandbodtman]

The sponsor of the bill was quoted at the end of the article that he would be opposed to atheists getting an "I don't believe " plate which to me clearly crosses the line between separation of church and state by denying other persons their chance to profess their religious preferences.

[Thalermade]

Since you said it keeps you up at night, going by definition one, it is a constitutional question: but probably not the kind you have in mind....

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dicti...constitutional
Main Entry: 1con·sti·tu·tion·al
Pronunciation: \-shnəl, -shə-nəl\ Function: adjective
Date: 1682
1 : relating to, inherent in, or affecting the constitution of body or mind
2 : of, relating to, or entering into the fundamental makeup of something : essential
3 : being in accordance with or authorized by the constitution of a state or society <a constitutional government>
4 : regulated by or ruling according to a constitution <a constitutional monarchy>
5 : of or relating to a constitution <a constitutional crisis>
6 : loyal to or supporting an established constitution or form of government

Russ

[430752]

who would buy?

But wouldn't a vanity plate (of any religion) be antithetical to any religion where it goes against both accumulation of material goods and idol worship?

[cwithboat]

In our state we have Seahawks plates and Mariners plates, and I guess for some folks that's a form of religion.

[Black wallnut]

Mods, if you deem this thread over the line on politics, religion, or both, feel free to nuke it.

I wonder about FL's train of thought here:
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/florida...938x1200023953

What I'm pondering is: Should there be a wall between church and state, and how high should it be? What about the rest of the First Amendment, specifically the Freedom of Speech clause?

I'll share my thoughts in a day or so. Suffice it to say, this is the kind of question that keeps me up at night.

To repeat, this thread is NOT meant as troll bait, nor is it to start a flame war. Instead, I feel this subject needs healthy, civil debate.

g.

First things first.... even before I was asked to be an adminstrator of this forum I have always been annoyed by posters with a line such as yours in essence granting permission to moderators to delete or move a post. Regardless of which forum a person is a member of it is a given that forum staff members have authority to delete posts. It is just part of the under paid job they do. It is at the whim of whomever owns the forum that sets the standard. I think most also have some sort of user agreement where a prospective poster must click I Agree prior to posting. Polite, respectful manners IMHO is for poster if they are unsure to first ask prior to posting anything they might in their gut think might be over the line.

Now to actually answer your questions:

1. should there be a wall between...? IMHO this is asking for others personally held political points of view. Not advisable under current forum rules.
2. about the rest of the First Admendment....... See above answer.
3. What you did not ask was if your fellow forum members thought about the state of Florida's idea. ..... Would it amount to the state estlabishing a religion...etc. I think this a state's right type of issue and yes it could involve politics. Since I'm not a voter in that state I actually could care less, but I also do not think this would be an establishment of religion. It would be the rather just the acknowledgment of one or more.

I agree with you that this is a subject that needs healthy civil debate, but I think this Forum is not the place for that debate. Our host Sam has asked us to avoid topics of politics and religion and this topic contains both at the same time. Even though it is possible for us to have a civil discussion does not mean Sam would welcome it. For now I will leave this open to hopefully hijack this topic into another about what is appropriate for discussion here. I'm hoping the Moderators will chime in with what they believe avoiding means and if this is over the line that they see.

Thanks for understanding!

[annunaki]

I agree with BlackWallnut

There are so many other blogs where this topic would be more appropiate

[Alex Franke]

I agree that this topic could go out of control pretty easily here, so I won't comment on it directly.

I would be interested in following a healthy debate on it, though, so if it does end up somewhere else, please PM me.

[LCHIEN]

if you have to ask the question and then offer to have it deleted, you already know its too close to the line.

[gsmittle]

First things first.... even before I was asked to be an adminstrator of this forum I have always been annoyed by posters with a line such as yours in essence granting permission to moderators to delete or move a post. Regardless of which forum a person is a member of it is a given that forum staff members have authority to delete posts. It is just part of the under paid job they do. It is at the whim of whomever owns the forum that sets the standard. I think most also have some sort of user agreement where a prospective poster must click I Agree prior to posting. Polite, respectful manners IMHO is for poster if they are unsure to first ask prior to posting anything they might in their gut think might be over the line.

Now to actually answer your questions:

1. should there be a wall between...? IMHO this is asking for others personally held political points of view. Not advisable under current forum rules.
2. about the rest of the First Admendment....... See above answer.
3. What you did not ask was if your fellow forum members thought about the state of Florida's idea. ..... Would it amount to the state estlabishing a religion...etc. I think this a state's right type of issue and yes it could involve politics. Since I'm not a voter in that state I actually could care less, but I also do not think this would be an establishment of religion. It would be the rather just the acknowledgment of one or more.

I agree with you that this is a subject that needs healthy civil debate, but I think this Forum is not the place for that debate. Our host Sam has asked us to avoid topics of politics and religion and this topic contains both at the same time. Even though it is possible for us to have a civil discussion does not mean Sam would welcome it. For now I will leave this open to hopefully hijack this topic into another about what is appropriate for discussion here. I'm hoping the Moderators will chime in with what they believe avoiding means and if this is over the line that they see.

Thanks for understanding!

Fair enough. I didn't really consider the implied "this is probably over the line but..." Of course, plenty of people will say I'm a "Ready, Fire Aim" type of person.

I consider my hand slapped, and in the future I'll ask first.

This is primarily a woodworking forum, yes, but it's one of the VERY few (and my personal favorite) forums where I knew I wouldn't get flamed for just bringing up the topic.

IF I find an appropriate and friendly forum for this thread, I'll let you all know.

Since I promised I'd give you my opinion, here it is:

Truth be told, I'm torn. I see the state's rights issues on the one hand, the free speech issues on the other hand, and the separation issue on the gripping hand.

Personally, I'd tend to fall in the "if it offends you, look away" camp. OTOH, I'd also want the choice to proclaim my beliefs for/against any other issue too.

I guess what prompted the original post was my perception that too few are willing to agree to disagree without name calling, insulting one's mother, etc.

g.

[radhak]

... insulting one's mother, etc.

g.

KEEP MY MOTHER OUT OF THIS, YOU @@@!#@#@ !!!

[OpaDC]

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsmittle View Post
... insulting one's mother, etc.

g.

KEEP MY MOTHER OUT OF THIS, YOU @@@!#@#@ !!!

We now know who "ONE" is.

p.s. As a Florida resident, I for one am sick and tired of all these plates. Started with t-shirts, then bumper stickers, now the license plates. Why does everyone insist on the whole world knowing what you care about or what your leanings are or.... But then thats just me, kind of a mind your own business kind of guy.

[Pappy]

I think the state legislators are opening up a Pandora's Box and issuing an open invitation to every sect, club, cult in the state. The ACLU, as well as several other groups, are sure to engage the idea in court, costing the Florida taxpayers a lot of money in legal fees.

Is it a violation, or expression, of the First Ammendmendant to the Constitution? There are nine learned people in Washington that we pay to make that determination. They, like the President, do not always enjoy my agreement with their decisions but do have my backing and allegiance.