Only a court could make you charge money for something that you want to give away!
Then again, giving IE away was what got Microsoft into trouble way back when......at least insanity is consistent!
"the study also says that use will turn a driver who is age 20 into age 70."
I guess that will make all the young drivers stop speeding and drive 20 mph under the speed limit.
Anything to slow down young drivers warrants a 'blue ribbon' study...
;)
- The US Supreme Court begins with the recitation "God save the United States and this honorable court"
- Congress begins each session with a prayer
- George Washington ***mandated*** a day of fasting and prayer after food was received at Valley Forge
The Founders actually setup a gov't based on religious principles -- with the caveat that there be no state-sponsored religion (i.e., leading the church and the state are not the same job). That's the way it was... and usually still is.
Funny that people want not just to change it, but to revise history...
You're right about the religious expression clause. I was simply referring to the 1st part of the Ammendment.
Despite the courts, I fail to understand how anti-obscenity laws should be struck down on 1st Ammendment grounds. That's especially puzzling in light of isolated local governments seemly being allowed to censure religious expressions such Christmas manger displays...
Given the era when the 1st Ammendment was passed, it seems odd that we should now turn it to mean that 'generally offensive' things should be protected and 'generally inoffensive' things may be stopped by additional laws....
What a strange world....
Granted, I went to school in the People's Republic of California, but doesn't the US 1st Ammendment refer to *political* free speech?
At least that was how the 1st Ammendment was originally intended...
"On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Justice William Johnson, 12 June 1823
Slashdot Mirror
Only a court could make you charge money for something that you want to give away! Then again, giving IE away was what got Microsoft into trouble way back when... ...at least insanity is consistent!
"the study also says that use will turn a driver who is age 20 into age 70." I guess that will make all the young drivers stop speeding and drive 20 mph under the speed limit. Anything to slow down young drivers warrants a 'blue ribbon' study... ;)
- The US Supreme Court begins with the recitation "God save the United States and this honorable court" - Congress begins each session with a prayer - George Washington ***mandated*** a day of fasting and prayer after food was received at Valley Forge The Founders actually setup a gov't based on religious principles -- with the caveat that there be no state-sponsored religion (i.e., leading the church and the state are not the same job). That's the way it was ... and usually still is.
Funny that people want not just to change it, but to revise history...
You're right about the religious expression clause. I was simply referring to the 1st part of the Ammendment. Despite the courts, I fail to understand how anti-obscenity laws should be struck down on 1st Ammendment grounds. That's especially puzzling in light of isolated local governments seemly being allowed to censure religious expressions such Christmas manger displays... Given the era when the 1st Ammendment was passed, it seems odd that we should now turn it to mean that 'generally offensive' things should be protected and 'generally inoffensive' things may be stopped by additional laws.... What a strange world....
Granted, I went to school in the People's Republic of California, but doesn't the US 1st Ammendment refer to *political* free speech? At least that was how the 1st Ammendment was originally intended... "On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Justice William Johnson, 12 June 1823