1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Supreme Court Protects Faith-Based Initiative

Discussion in '2007 Archive' started by 2 Timothy2:1-4, Jun 25, 2007.

  1. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Supreme Court vote was 5-4 in the case of Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation (U.S. No. 06-157). The ACLJ filed an amicus brief with the high court in support of the federal government’s position which prevailed today.
    “This is a very significant victory that sends a powerful message that atheists and others antagonistic to religion do not get an automatic free pass to bring Establishment Clause lawsuits,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. “The Supreme Court got it right in determining that the plaintiffs who challenged the President’s faith-based initiative had no legal standing to do so. This decision will have serious ramifications for separationist attempts to claim special privileges to sue as taxpayers without showing that a law or government activity actually injured them in any way. This is an important victory for the judicial system and for the President’s faith-based initiative. By rejecting a claim to special treatment for atheists and other separationists, the high court took an important step toward restoring equity to the legal system with respect to federal challenges in the Establishment Clause arena.”



    http://www.aclj.org/News/Read.aspx?...org&guid=8B1A49C9-E2B1-4A8D-BE65-012C31B1EEBC
     
  2. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Ratings:
    +0
    This 5-4 decision is a very bad one. The government has no business giving public funding to religious organizations.
     
  3. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Ratings:
    +0
    Was this ruling approving the government giving money to faith based organizations or was it about who has standing to sue?

    My understanding (insert your own joke here) was that the SCOTUS was simply saying that these people did not have standing to sue.
     
  4. hillclimber1

    hillclimber1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,447
    Ratings:
    +0
    That is correct, at least that is my understanding.
     
  5. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Ratings:
    +0
    The ruling says that the party suing does not have standing to sue because they were not injured as a result of the initiative. Which is why Roe v. Wade should be revisited because the party suing was not in fact injured and lied in court there by she had no legal standing to sue.
     
Loading...