Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/10/20

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building
From: abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge)
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 21:17:42 -0700
References: <AANLkTi=Gdg=328M5hzgoWGk6gMgJnERW=qOFJA=3kDky@mail.gmail.com> <5B48B507-FB2D-4192-8928-9B9B59A71ADE@charter.net> <AANLkTins=swvezjWsUGSV-f6EUmRGrFgs1mUbuvgA_zd@mail.gmail.com> <4CBF5657.8060600@csdco.com>

Well, if it's literally meant "separation of Church and State" then
she's right: those precise words don't exist in the 1st Amendment.
However, the meaning of those words is contained in the very first
sentence of the 1st Amendment. The phrase appears to originate with
some dufus with radical ideas named Jefferson, as in Thomas Jefferson
the fellow who wrote the "Declaration of Independence". You can read
about it here if you're interested:

<http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html>

Thomas Jefferson was a Republican as opposed to the Federalists when
things in the new United States were every bit as nasty as they are
right now. It was Jefferson's refusal to have a Justice of the Peace
for the District of Columbia granted his position that lead to Marbry
vs Madison and the beginning of the US Supreme Court's power of
judicial review.

I'm sure a real lawyer could do a better job than I.

I respond to the list only to try to make explicit for non-US folks
what all the fuss is about.

Adam Bridge


On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:51 PM, John Nebel <john.nebel at csdco.com> wrote:
> Law prof says she was right!
>
> <http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/10/what-if-christine-odonnell-were-right.html>
>
> On 10/19/2010 10:15 PM, Richard Man wrote:
>>
>> Well, we have people running for Congress that does not know about the
>> First
>> Amendment - "what do you mean the Constitution says there is separation of
>> Church and State," so what do you expect from Hire-a-Cop?
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:58 PM, slobodan Dimitrov
>> <s.dimitrov at charter.net>wrote:
>>
>>> It reminds me of Germany, to this day!
>>> S.d.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 19, 2010, at 6:15 PM, scleroplex wrote:
>>>
>>> ?isn't it an amazing country that one actually needs to go to court to
>>> make
>>>>
>>>> it clear that one can take photos of public buildings and courthouses?!
>>>> reminds me of the soviet union.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from chris at chriscrawfordphoto.com (Chris Crawford) ([Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building)
In reply to: Message from scleroplex at gmail.com (scleroplex) ([Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building)
Message from s.dimitrov at charter.net (slobodan Dimitrov) ([Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building)
Message from richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building)
Message from john.nebel at csdco.com (John Nebel) ([Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building)