david@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) (05/14/85)
Reply to a question
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From: atkins@opus.UUCP (Brian Atkins)
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.religion,net.politics
Subject: Violation of separation church and state????
Message-ID: <1192@opus.UUCP>
Date: 13 May 85 03:34:41 GMT
I have a question, which I would like to hear argued by any parties
from all these news groups. I have a very lay understanding of separation
of church and state and would like to see good arguments pro and con on
this particular example, which I feel is in clear violation (and if it isn't,
under current interpretation, I would like to see an new interpretation).
Here is the example. Here in Colorado, it is against the law to sell liquor
(and automobiles) retail on Sunday. Bars and restaurants can sell prepaired
drinks and whatnot, but you can't buy bottles of the stuff in liquor stores.
I presume that this law is motivated by the Christian sabbath, as I can
see no other reason behind it (if this isn't the reason behind it, please
let me know what is).
Assuming this, Is this not a clear violation of the separation of church
and state? Is S of C & S a basis for constitutionality, is it just custom,
or does it only apply to laws which seek to restrict religious practices?
If replies are sent to the net all can follow the argument (assuming
someone other than myself is interested...). If this bothers someone,
sing out and I'll formally request replies to myself via mail rather than
net.
Ever seeking enlightenment...
Brian Atkins ...{attunix, hao, allegra, ucbvax}!nbires!atkins
NBI Inc., P.O. Box 9001, Boulder CO 80301 (303) 444-5710
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I rarely drink, so as far as I'm concerned they can
ban liquor (and automobile) sales six days of the week, and
perhaps we wouldn't have so many deaths and injuries because
of drunk drivers, especially on weekends when people are on
the road.
As I understand it, the principle of separation of church
and state is primarily to minimize government interference in
religion, where religion does not harm civil rights. It can hardly
be said that banning sales of these two things (or of other less
dangerous things) on Sunday is harmful at all (although it might
make business in these things less efficient or profitable). There
frankly some things are more important than money -- and here there
are three more important things than business -- religion, safety
on weekends, and democratic opinion.
The other purpose of separation is to insure religious
tolerance and freedom from persecution by others, so that the
state does not discriminate between sects (so long as they do not
clearly harm society).
Would you like to support a law to ban liquor sales
six days a week? I can see plenty in favor of this, which has
nothing to do with religion.
David Harwoodjcp@osiris.UUCP (Jody Patilla) (05/15/85)
> As I understand it, the principle of separation of church > and state is primarily to minimize government interference in > religion, where religion does not harm civil rights. ..................... > Would you like to support a law to ban liquor sales > six days a week? I can see plenty in favor of this, which has > nothing to do with religion. > > David Harwood I thought the original intention of the separation of church and state was to minimize religious interference in government ! That's quite a different thing than what's stated above. I would NOT support a law to ban liquor sales at any time. In fact, I object to all forms of "blue laws". Anyone who has something they want to sell should be allowed to do so regardless of which religious sect's weekly holiday it is. -- jcpatilla "'Fancy thinking the Beast was something you could hunt and kill !'"
rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (05/15/85)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I rarely drink, so as far as I'm concerned they can > ban liquor (and automobile) sales six days of the week, and > perhaps we wouldn't have so many deaths and injuries because > of drunk drivers, especially on weekends when people are on > the road. > Would you like to support a law to ban liquor sales > six days a week? I can see plenty in favor of this, which has > nothing to do with religion. > > David Harwood I'm surprised that you take such a narrow view, considering the rest of your article so accurately showed the purpose of seperation is to guarentee, in part, tolerance of others. As for your question, my answer is no. This country has already tried "The Grand Experiment" and found that it didn't work. I drink. When I do it to excess, I don't drive. This doesn't intrude into your life. Please don't intrude into mine. *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) (05/16/85)
> As I understand it, the principle of separation of church > and state is primarily to minimize government interference in > religion, where religion does not harm civil rights. It can hardly > be said that banning sales of these two things (or of other less > dangerous things) on Sunday is harmful at all (although it might > make business in these things less efficient or profitable). Possibly we WOULD have a safer highway if liquor sales were banned on weekends. But then again... people would probably "stock up" by buying liquor on the 7th day and getting drunk on weekends anyway. It's the principal of the thing that matters here. Who is to regulate what I buy or what I do any day of the week? As long as I don't hurt anyone I should be able to go about my business unfetered by state or federal buerocracys. Liquor sales are not dangerous in themselves. Abusive drinking (especially before driving) is... but how can you regulate this without stamping on someone's freedom of movement? It's a touchy issue. > There frankly some things are more important than money -- and here > there are three more important things than business -- religion, safety > on weekends, and democratic opinion. If you took a poll, I would be willing to wager that the majority of people would not care about liquor sales as such. They would no doubt become more incensed to see some local government "lording it over them" by telling them that they can't buy liquor or drink it when they want to? This goes for the "Blue Laws" as well. > Would you like to support a law to ban liquor sales six days a week? Banning liquor sales won't change how often people use it. It's also unreasonable to ban people from conducting free commerce for such a large stretch of time. The liquor retailers would have a fit... not because they would loose money... but because they would be disallowed from doing business for 6/7 of a year! You can't conduct business on this basis. It's too restrictive. I'm a fan of responsible and not legislative action. > I can see plenty in favor of this, which has nothing to do with religion. No kidding. I can't imagine a bill like this passing through either the senate or the house. It would be tuff enough just getting something like this through a local municipal government. Frankly, I think the majority of people that would push for such a resolution WOULD be those with deeply religious convictions. -- UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root - Lord Frith ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO Nasha Lutcha!