Showing posts with label supreme court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label supreme court. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Stop praying in public. It is sinful

From The Christian Science Monitor:
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that challenges whether the city council of Greece, N.Y., can open its meetings with a public prayer. The arguments will likely focus on an appeals court ruling that found the prayers – given by a range of believers from Jew to Wiccan but dominantly Christian – smack too much of religion.

The lower court said those giving the prayers were prone to “convey their views of religious truth.”
The high court may not take kindly to judges passing judgment on the types of prayers, at least the spoken kind that are delivered in a government setting. For a court to impose a definition of prayer – by reviewing prayers and then banning them – could be seen as coercive. It would imply a government hand in how individuals should, or should not, pray.
Godalmighty, I'm so tired of writing about this.  Here's what Jesus had to say about public prayer.  (And Jesus is the primary god/ghost/spirit/SkyMan being prayed to in this conflict.)  If you accept his teachings as infallible, it carries the same weight as his teaching on giving, self-sacrifice, and money, all of  which, now that I think about it, is also cheerfully ignored. 

Matthew 6:5-8
“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words."

That's it.  The final word.  When you pray, go to your room and close the freakin' door.  Don't get behind a microphone and ask God's blessings upon the unholy works of the Greece, N.Y. city council. 


 

Sunday, September 4, 2011

The Little Pink House, Kelo v. New London, stealing stuff, and government incompetence

In 2005, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Kelo v. New London, using the powers of eminent domain to seize property from one private owner and hand it over to another private owner -- a developer who promised more than 3,000 new jobs and $1.2 million in tax revenue.

In other words, someone's campaign contributor wanted some land, but didn't want to sell at the price the contributor wanted to pay.  Favors were called in.  Strings were pulled.  Stuff was stolen.  Nothing more to it than that. 
This is from the Gideon's Trumpet blog:

As regular readers of this blog know, the redevelopment project that gave rise to the wretched U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London, never came about. In spite of the city’s boasting about the quality of its plans, nothing was ever built on the Fort Trumbull site from which the city displaced an entire unoffending, well maintained lower middle-class neighborhood. Though the formal taking took place in 2000 and the U.S. Supreme Court gave its approval to it in 2005, the city’s project has been a failure, with 91 acres of waterfront property sitting there empty and overgrown by weeds.

Now, we learn from the local newspaper, The Day, that following the hurricane Irene, the city has designated the Fort Trumbull redevelopment site as a place to dump vegetation debris. For a video of locals dumping that stuff on the site, click here.

Connecticut taxpayers have thus been soaked tens of millions of dollars, not just for nothing, but for making things worse — for transforming a nice local neighborhood into a dump.

Here's a video of citizens hauling their post-storm crap to what was once a nice little neighborhood:



The best book on the Kelo vs. New London case is Little Pink House. 


Here's a summary, from Amazon.com:

Suzette Kelo was just trying to rebuild her life when she purchased a broken-down Victorian house perched on the waterfront in New London, CT. The house wasn't particularly fancy, but with lots of hard work Suzette was able to turn it into a home that was important to her, a home that represented her new found independence.



Little did she know that the City of New London, desperate to revive its flailing economy, wanted to raze her house and the others like it that sat along the waterfront in order to win a lucrative Pfizer pharmaceutical contract that would bring new business into the city. Kelo and fourteen neighbors flat out refused to sell, so the city decided to exercise its power of eminent domain to condemn their homes, launching one of the most extraordinary legal cases of our time, a case that ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court.


In Little Pink House, award-winning investigative journalist Jeff Benedict takes us behind the scenes of this case -- indeed, Suzette Kelo speaks for the first time about all the details of this inspirational true story as one woman led the charge to take on corporate America to save her home.

I'll never understand what makes voters believe that their city councils, governors, state reps, congressmen, or presidents have a clue about economic development.  Why?  Because they don't have a clue. 

And even if they did, it wouldn't justify theft.  Here's some John Mellencamp, on the joy of owning a Little Pink House, and not having to worry about Fascists stealing it. 

This means you, Jerry Jones



Monday, February 8, 2010

Nick Gillespie debates Lawrence Lessig

My friend Dr. Ralph, of The Journal Of Post-Ralphaelite Thought, has long been the agent provocateur of this site, and he does his job well. Especially for someone whose job it is to be WRONG WRONG WRONG on almost all economic issues.
Dr. Ralph admires Harvard University's Lawrence Lessig.

I'm a huge fan of Reason magazine's Nick Gillespie. I have a black leather jacket that's almost identical to the one Gillespie wears to all his video and TV appearances, and my political opinions are almost identical to Gillespie's, but I have much less hair.

Lessig and Gillespie debate The Supreme Court's recent Citizens United ruling here. Bill Moyers is the moderator.

Enjoy.