Little1Lost@feddit.de to Malicious Compliance@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoPretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)midwest.socialimagemessage-square71fedilinkarrow-up11.44Karrow-down135cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up11.4Karrow-down1imagePretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)midwest.socialLittle1Lost@feddit.de to Malicious Compliance@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square71fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squareRev3rze@lemdit.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 year agoWhat I don’t understand is how the national motto can be a religious one without breaking the first amendment.
minus-squareMajawat@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 year agoIt hasn’t reached the Supreme Court for a decision, but lower courts have basically said that it’s not establing a religion because it’s used in a secular and patriotic fashion. (My interpretation of my understanding of the ruling). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aronow_v._United_States You can blame 1956 Cold War era Congress (red scare) and Eisenhower.
What I don’t understand is how the national motto can be a religious one without breaking the first amendment.
It hasn’t reached the Supreme Court for a decision, but lower courts have basically said that it’s not establing a religion because it’s used in a secular and patriotic fashion. (My interpretation of my understanding of the ruling).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aronow_v._United_States
You can blame 1956 Cold War era Congress (red scare) and Eisenhower.