Im sorry but how is this legal? And it's not recent...law was signed in 2006
http://www.alternet.org/belief/year-...uting-atheists
Edit: Sorry for the typo for atheist...I tried to fix it and screwed up somewhere without checking it...oops
Printable View
Im sorry but how is this legal? And it's not recent...law was signed in 2006
http://www.alternet.org/belief/year-...uting-atheists
Edit: Sorry for the typo for atheist...I tried to fix it and screwed up somewhere without checking it...oops
You can also be jailed for riding a horse thru a tunnel
Kinda different dont you think? Youre comparing common sense to a clear violation of your constitutional rightsQuote:
Originally Posted by dan_bgblue
Atheism isn't always considered common sense either...
Law would never hold up were it to be enforced, and it hasn't been, so the claim athiests are being "persecuted" isn't true. To be persecuted something has to happen to you, and nothing has happened. "Offending atheists" maybe, but not persecuting.
Also disagree this Rep is "abusing his office." Abusing an office is fraud or violation of codes of ethical conduct. He's being elected again and again by voters who clearly think he's expressing their desires. That's not an abuse of office. That's representing your constituents.
No I don't support the law, think the court should have struck it down, but I find it superfluous so it doesn't really concern me either. It's not been enforced and it won't be and if it were attempted it would fail, so like Dan I put it more in the "stupid laws on the books no one uses" category. Symbolic for him and the laws supporters, but it's only symbolic.
I absolutely don't think there's a right to not be offended, so that doesn't move me. There are 1,000s of laws that offend my and my beliefs, so they can get in line.
The politicians in Kentucky's legislature (and apparently on our Supreme Court) are afraid of being labeled anti-God if they go against him. His wife was a state representative who sponsored the bill requiring Kentucky classrooms to display the Ten Commandments. The US Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1980.
I'm confused about how exactly he thinks jailing atheists enhances our security. Is it atheists he's scared of, or any non-Christian?
You can be imprisoned for homosexuality in Mt according to statute, but common law says otherwise. Lots of obsolete statutes in state law that courts have ruled on multiple times but still aren't removed
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Catonahottinroof
I would think non-Christians given the Islamic issue, otherwise I don't get it either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Catfan73
it's a stupid law, can't deny it, and pretty easily unconstitutional, but I disagree with their description of his actions or that the law has any meaning in reality, and lack of that meaning means there is no "repression". Just a guy getting laws written that mean nothing. Annoying, not a big issue.
Kentucky also had laws against sodomy which had to go to the Ky Supreme Court. It was b/c it was used against someone, and if this ever were it would go there too.
Since this article, like most articles of its type, are poorly written, it's hard to tell what KRS section to which they're referring and what the current posture of the case is.
I did find this which indicates the constitutionality was upheld by the state Court of Appeals in 08. It's hard to know what happened after that.
Regardless, no one's being persecuted for anything.