Casey+Ramos

Religious Freedom Limitations?

Is the freedom of religious expression in public buildings regarding Christianity protected under the First Amendment even when it offends other groups?
This problem has been one that has shown up throughout history and will always be an issue. Some other groups such as atheists are offended by the expression of the Christian religion in buildings that aren't related to religion. These groups feel like religion should stay inside the churches instead of pubic buildings such as the state house. However, Christians argue that our country was founded on Christian values and should not offend any American. Moreover, both sides present compelling arguments that can be supported by the First Amendment.




 * For Christian Displays || Against Christian Displays ||
 * * Christians have the right to express their religion, given to them by the First Amendment.
 * Cross memorials are for the deceased which connects most with religion and should not be messed with in respect to the dead.
 * The Ten Commandment, although religious, is the basics of our law systems.
 * Some courts have decided that a seemingly religious display could not be religious at all.
 * It is not that Christians are underminding other religions, it is because they want to share their own.
 * Displays are not put up to anger people of other religions.
 * The First Amendment does not use, "seperation of church and state." It is from a presedental letter.
 * The Establishment Clause does not prohibit Christian displays, it actually protects them.
 * One group should not cause the right to be taken away for everyone. || * Other religions are offended by their expression.
 * Non-Christians think they are undermined.
 * Other religions are not able to express their religion as freely as Christians.
 * The Constitution says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
 * It is believed that some courts are biased to some cases because of their own religion.
 * Even if Christianity seems to be a dominent religion, there are other religions.
 * Displays that premote one religion, especially on public grounds, are unconstitutional.
 * DIsplays go against the Establishment Clause.
 * Some people use this type of endorsement as a way to terrorize. ||

Court Cases Thomas Van Orden v. Rick Perry: The issue was the display of the Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of the Texas State Capitol. This case went to the Supreme Court and rules the display constitutional. McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky: The issue was the display of the Ten Commandments in the courthouse in frames copies. The Supreme Court rules this display unconstitutional, on the same day that the Thomas Van Orden v. Rick Perry case came with the opposite outcome.

County of Allegheny v. ACLU: The issue was a display of Christian and Jewish holiday decorations on the grounds of the Pennsylvania courthouse. The ACLU made the case that the displays were an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The court decided in favor of the ACLU, causing the Pennsylvania courthouse to have to take down their holiday decorations.

What I Think Taking in all of the information regarding this issue, it has allowed me to reach a conclusion. I am on the side of the Christians with obvious bias. I believe that the First Amendment rights should be protected under almost any circumstance. I do think that their are people to take advantage of their freedom and use it for immoral things such as terrorizing. However, I do not believe this should take away everyone's rights. Christians are taught to spread their religion and the First Amendment gives them the right to do so. Others, however, are attempting to rob them of that right.

Work Cited  Brown, Matthew. "Restrictions on Religion Rise across the Globe, including in the U.S." Desert News. N.p., 20  Sept. 2012. Web. 11 Dec. 2012. "County of Allegheny v. ACLU Greater Pittsburgh Chapter." Religious Freedom. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2012. MCCREARY COUNTY v. ACLU. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 10 December 2012.

Perlstein, Rick. "The Ballad Of Ake Green." //TomPaine.Common Sense//. N.p., 7 June 2007. Web. 11 Dec. 2012.

"Van Orden v. Perry, in His Official Capacity as Governor Of Texas and Chairman, State Preservation Board,  Et Al." Find Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2012.