It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by vivalarevolution
They've removed the 10 commandments from public places in the US because a couple of atheists complained that they were offended, what's the difference?..
Source | balticmill.com | Baltic Centre for Contemporary Art in Gateshead | Introduction
WHAT IS BALTIC?
Housed in a landmark industrial building on the south bank of the River Tyne in Gateshead, BALTIC is the biggest gallery of its kind in the world – presenting a dynamic, diverse and international programme of contemporary visual art.
BALTIC has no permanent collection, providing instead an ever-changing calendar of exhibitions and activities that give a unique and compelling insight into contemporary artistic practice. The BALTIC programme ranges from blockbuster exhibitions to innovative new work and projects created by artists working within the local community.
BALTIC is a place where visitors can experience innovative and provocative new art, relax, have fun, learn and discover fresh ideas.
BALTIC receives funding from The National Lottery through Arts Council England, Gateshead Council, Northern Rock Foundation and is supported by the European Regional Development Fund and One NorthEast.
Source | msnbc | Split rulings on Ten Commandments displays
Split rulings on Ten Commandments displays
Supreme Court: Courthouse exhibits crossed line, but outdoor tablet OK
updated 11:36 a.m. PT, Mon., June. 27, 2005
WASHINGTON - A sharply divided Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutionality of displaying the Ten Commandments on government land, but drew the line on displays that promote religion, saying they violated the doctrine of separation of church and state.
The high court said displays of the Ten Commandments — like their own courtroom frieze — are not inherently unconstitutional. But each exhibit demands scrutiny to determine whether it goes too far in amounting to a governmental promotion of religion, the court said in a case involving Kentucky courthouse exhibits.
Source | msnbc | Split rulings on Ten Commandments displays
Justices have outlined several different tests in recent years to determine their constitutionality:
* Secular purpose; was there religious motive?
* Endorsement; do they show a government neutrality toward religion?
* Coercion; do they place impermissible pressure, such as school prayer?
* Historical practice; are they part of the “fabric of our society,” such as legislative prayer?
The Supreme Court frieze, for instance, depicts Moses and the tablets as well as 17 other figures including Hammurabi, Confucius, Napoleon and Chief Justice John Marshall. Because it includes secular figures in a way that doesn’t endorse religion, the display would be constitutional, Justice John Paul Stevens suggested in a 1989 ruling.
Originally posted by SoLaR513
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the United States Bill of Rights. It prohibits the federal legislature from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" (the "Establishment Clause") or that prohibit free exercise of religion (the "Free Exercise Clause"), laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to assemble peaceably, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Totally off topic...