I got bored and kept reading about this...Marsh is the last time the Supreme Court ruled on legislative prayer so that law is binding over anything else, but there is a 6th circuit (tennessee's federal court) case called Coles v Cleveland Board of Education that will probably be relevant. The 6th circuit struck down all prayer before those meetings as unconstitutional but the ruling was pretty heavily criticized. Marsh definitely leaves the door open to prayer but regulates it rather heavily. The Hamilton County case should be pretty interesting to see how much leeway the courts give these guys, but it seems like direct invocation of a specific religion by a commissioner is pretty clearly unconstitutional. Is anybody else reading the law differently?
Marsh v Chambers 463 U.S. 783 is the Supreme Court case referred to in the article if anybody wants to check her out. Seems like alot of time and energy could have been saved had someone just emailed those commissioners. But it made for a really interesting newspaper feed. Also, and probably more relevant, here is an article about the Court's recent actions towards legislative prayer...http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-17/prayer-cases-turned-away-by-u-s-supreme-court-justices.html.
Don't mean to be antagonistic, but it seems as though the commissioners are in the wrong here. And since my tax dollars are in this too, I think an immediate end is the only logical response. Drop the prayers. Drop the suit. Get on with more important things.
Alcohol is part of our culture. It's as integral in the American lifestyle as apple pie. That's not to say that alcohol isn't an extremely powerful intoxicant that creates serious liability when consumed. But young adults should be led through the process of drinking rather than forced in to the woods. Embracing alcohol education seems vastly more fruitful than punishing behavior that is so heavily promoted in mainstream society. Increasing punishment won't end underage drinking. It will only create more hazardous conditions, more arrests, and more of a forbidden fruit mentality. Instead of obsessively sheltering our teenagers, we should be focusing on guiding them towards a healthy and rational adulthood.
In my opinion, that part of the world isn't nearly as complicated as it makes itself out to be. All of the problems can be boiled down to a simple real estate dispute.
Sure, both sides have legitimate claims to "the throne" but all that is required to solve that problem is for the rest of the world to start drawing lines. And in reality, we did so at the end of WWII, or at least by 1969. The rest of the conflict has been caused by Israeli expansion.
Most of the world seems to agree that Palestine should be an independent state. If that's the case, I'm confused why we allow one party to this real estate dispute (Israel) determine the future of the situation. The solution seems clear. Draw enforceable lines. The two parties (Israel and Palestine) seem categorically incapable of resolving their differences.
No more settlements. Establish clear and definitive rules of citizenship for both sides. And treat subsequent interactions in the same manner as every other conflict in the world.
And no more Bible quotes when referencing geopolitical property disputes.
Of course, leaving that particular region of the world to its own devices would be perceived as a major move towards the palistinians. I guess that's the big Israeli hustle. Inaction would come off as serious action. Those settlements probably wouldn't last too much longer after that. And then Conservative would have his feelings hurt knowing that GOD was making the Israelis behave like adults.
Conservative skeers me. Israel skeers me. Palestinians skeer me. What say we just leave them all alone and worry about things back at home.