Read this, and my comment to it.
Related Posts
Passports
They are needed to fly. I don’t discount the whole plot, but there is something not right with the announcement happening a day after Lieberman (Republican in Democrat’s clothing – Connecticut) losing the primary. Here’s a piece on the chemistry involved. Technorati Tags: London, terrorism
Guantanamo Lawyer Harassed
Allegedly. Details here. A question for lawyers in general. Assume a lawyer wasn’t coming from Gitmo on a military plane, where he is clearly a target for investigation. If a lawyer were coming to the US from Canada and had client files, is the Customs Dept. violating confidentiality by going through those files? What if I, as a teacher, had student files on me that are meant to be confidential (strictly entering the US)? Technorati Tags: Guantanamo, war on terror[ism][ists]
Marriage is a gay event
While I don’t live in the Republic of Cambridge, I do spend enough time there that the ruling concerning gay marriage has a personal impact on my friends. I posted a while ago about how I think it’s a bad idea for the state to legislate morality. There may be arguments for legislating against marriage for same-sex couples, but morality is surprisingly not in the state’s interest. Haroon, from over at Avari-nameh, challenged my basic assumption, and I promised him a good fight, but let it go. Now he’s posting on the same subject, using the same source no less!,…
2 thoughts on “Idolizing the big 10”
Comments are closed.
I agree with your comments. Asra Nomani in her book points out that the Saudis are hardcore about pictures of people being idolatrous, but that hasn’t stopped them from plastering Mecca with pictures of the ruling caste. Apparently, not looking directly into the camera is the key difference between idolatry and a halal snapshot.
It’s hard to believe that Ten Commandments cases are still litigated, but there you go. I’ll predict a split-the-baby (but hardly Solomonaic) decision that will generate litigation (and legal fees) for years still. Here’s my prediction: on a 5-4 vote, displays of the Ten Commandments on public property will be held not to violate constitutional principles of separation of church and state. However, the court will refuse to establish a bright line rule but instead hold that in each case, the question will be whether the display is, in the “totality of the circumstances” for a secular or religious purpose. One “prong” of the test will be how prominent the display is. So a display the size of a house in a public park is out, but a small display in a courthouse along with, say, a display of a copy of the constitution or the magna carta is not. Sometimes, this is as intellectual as constitutional analysis gets.
But this court is not about to invalidate the countless examples of religious iconography that has always been present in American public life, like prayers before legislative sessions, or even the Court’s baliff’s cry of “God save this Honorable Court” before the Nine take the bench. The last two examples are not implicated directly in the present cases, but you can seen the “slippery slope” that the examples present. On the the hand, I don’t think this Court is prepared to say that it’s ok to have laser light shows over the Capitol building featuring the Ten Commandments and Cecil B. DeMille’s voiceover.
But of course, I could be wrong. Allahu alam.
Oddly enough, I think I would be OK with the laser light shows. You could argue about the ephemerality of life (Buddhism), the cyclical nature of life (Hinduism), techno-wizadry (Atheism), of course you make the Abrahamics happy. Although I was thinking James Earl Jones for the voice.