"A government that roams the land, tearing down monuments with religious symbolism and scrubbing away any reference to the divine will strike many as aggressively hostile to religion. Militantly secular regimes have carried out such projects in the past..."
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
See, I don't like that. There are much, much better reasons. Just because something is familiar doesn't make it good.
-
It is not a justification. It is a presumption. The default should favor tradition. Chesterton’s fence and whatnot. In this case, there was clearly no establishment problem when the cross went up. You don’t create one because people are jerks now.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Luckily the country did that 13th Amendment thing instead of relying on courts and lawsuit interpretation,, right? Kinda cool how that works for Justice Alito.
- Show replies
-
-
-
As a lawyer doing preservation law for 20 yrs, I can say he is 100% correct. Arguably, the symbolism and relationship to a community is the most important criterion to warrant preservation of a thing. Would preservation of Notre Dame be invalid merely bc it was a church?
-
If you've read the opinion, Alito talks about Notre Dame.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm OK with the verdict, but I think this statement is far too broad. I don't think treasonous armed insurrectionists who lost a war so they could own another race of people deserve participation trophies, just because of "familiarity".
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.