Kentucky counties fined $400,000 for posting Ten Commandments

[TheCoxwain]

Source: Guardian

Two southern Kentucky counties where officials posted copies of the Ten Commandments in courthouses have been ordered by a federal judge to pay more than $400,000 to the American Civil Liberties Union and citizens who successfully challenged the displays.

US district judge Jennifer B Coffman ordered Pulaski and McCreary counties to pay $393,798 in attorneys' fees and $8,133 in expenses to the ACLU of Kentucky and citizens.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/18/kentucky-ten-commandments-fines

---

Whooo Hoooo!!!

[get the red out]

1. Genius at work

People in this state suffering through the ice storm and economic crisis this winter and these idiots throwing away money on posturing. Hateful.

Why are there so many assholes in my state?

[Soylent Brice]

2. yeah, thanks for mitchell, jerk. j/k

[Ian David]

36. Because there are so few foreheads? n/t

[Zhade]

47. I don't know. Maybe you should move.

This isn't posturing. The ACLU spent money it never should have had to spend to defend the Constitution.

[terisan]

3. If they are Christians--Why do they never post Christ's TWO Commandments?

Those 2 about all you need to do to enter Heaven is love God and love your Neighbor.

[reggie the dog]

39. nail hit firmly on head

[FiveGoodMen]

4. Good

[prostock69]

5. Sweet! n/t

[frebrd]

6. Yesss! n/t

[No Elephants]

7. Thank you, ACLU, for another victory in protecting our

civil rights.

Being a member of the ACLU costs as little as $20 a year.

https://secure.aclu.org/site/Donation2?df_id=2125&2125.donation=form1&s_src=UNW090001C00&s_subsrc=donationpage&JServSessionIdr008=fzodb6w7f1.app26a



Please consider it.

[SCantiGOP]

49. I just got my new membership card

Member since 1978.

[Dollface]

8. They're just tryin to make Glenn Blech cry again. This should distract the wing-nuts from AIG.

[OwnedByFerrets]

9. O'Lielly would prob PAY the money just so he can have

another "cause" to bitch about on his Faux comedy show.

[newtothegame]

10. My god...seriously...state budgets are getting killed and government money is going to the ACLU?

Why are we cheering this?

Order them to take them down, whatever. But seriously, getting $400,000 for being offended, I'll take that bet anyday. Just let me find something to be offended by quick...

If they seriously needed to fine them, couldn't the money have gone to charity or something?

ed for sp

[skooooo]

11. ..

:popcorn:

[harmonicon]

12. it did go to charity, in a way

Almost all of that was in court costs incurred by the ACLU doing nothing but ensuring that the civil rights of citizens are respected. The real shame is that the fools who thought they could step all over the constitution didn't realize that what they were really doing was stealing from the people who work to pay taxes which pay their salaries - or, more likely, they did realize this, and just didn't give a fuck.

[newtothegame]

13. I am all for taking down the commandments; clearly a violation.

But seriously? With state budgets crimped, the ACLU is not just gonna sue to take it down, but sue for money?

And if you're making the argument that the ACLU sues for punative damages to keep the defendants from doing it again, why doesn't the ACLU always donate any winnings from their cases to charity? They don't need the money themselves.

Am I asking a reasonable question here? Am I completely out of my mind?

ed for sp

[askeptic]

14. The hell they Don't!

The ACLU works on private - non-tax-deductible donations from it's members - the ones who want the rule of law followed. These counties would be riding roughshod over the Bill of Rights were it not for the ACLU and a few others. They deserve to be re-imbursed for the legal costs of bringing suit since the ACLU always asks nicely before bringing suit. It is the County that decided to defy federal law and chose to give the middle finger to the ACLU, too. They chose to spend taxpayer dollars trying to do what they knew wasn't legal by choosing to fight the ACLU in court.

[Winterblues]

24. Did you even read it?

:shrug:

[14thColony]

31. Seriously, did you read anything past the title?

The ACLU sought no punitive damages. The money is for 10 years of legal fees and expenses.

[reggie the dog]

40. the ACLU is a charity itself in a way

[SCantiGOP]

50. they didn't sue for money

They were reimbursed their expenses to fight the case. The state was already aware the posting was illegal, and they did it anyway.

[FiveGoodMen]

15. Separation of church and state are in the 1st Amendment

That makes them pretty important.

Those who violated it clearly thought they knew better than the Constitution and could just ignore the law.

Telling them they were wrong does nothing.

Making them pay might make them think twice next time.

[newtothegame]

17. Again though, if you wanna make them pay, why not give the money to charity?

Why do people need to be "compensated" to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars for being offended?

Wouldn't the ACLU's case be better made, and wouldn't it be more effective in attacks against Repukes, if it always gave winnings to charities? Do people really need to be instant millionaires (not talking about this particular case) for being offended?

[FiveGoodMen]

28. The ACLU is a charity

I give them money without compensation.

[surrealAmerican]

41. You're missing something here.

The ACLU are not being compensated for "being offended"; they're being compensated for their legal costs for the years of work they did on this case.

[FudaFuda]

20. That'd work, if it weren't public money.

Make the responsible individuals pay - not $400,000, but a meaningful amount. Coughing up $400,000 from public coffers doesn't hurt anyone except everyone.

[paulsby]

25. as a point of law

seperation of church and state was in a letter from a founding father, and the principle is established through CASE LAW as a principle underlying the 1st amendment (by most legal scholars and as legal rulings)

the 1st amendment does not contain the phrase "seperation of church and state".

[FiveGoodMen]

26. I didn't say it contained the phrase

[paulsby]

29. you said it's "in the first amendment"

that's a bit misleading imo.

it would be like saying the "right to privacy" is in the 4th.

but i get your point.

[Jokerman]

18. Try reading the OP

"getting $400,000 for being offended"

The money is to reimburse the ACLU for their COSTS in fighting a clearly unconstitutional action.

[no limit]

19. becase the ACLU doesn't work for peanuts...they need money to operate like anyone else

the ACLU asked them nicely to remove these, the county refused. So it went to court where the ACLU had to pay a lot of money to fight the case. The county lost, they are now responsible for the fees ACLU had to pay. Simple as that.

[Winterblues]

23. The money was for Legal Fees

It had to go to court because they refused to just take them down. The ACLU won their case and should be reimbursed for their expenses. It should never have gone to court but they insist upon forcing their religion upon the people so they need to be shown they can't do that.

[14thColony]

30. Re-read the article...

There was ZERO monetary award for punitive damages...your "being offended." The $400k is to reimburse the ACLU for 10 years of court costs and 1300 hours of a legal firm's time researching, preparing, and litigating in court. The counties wouldn't quit the case, and in the process the ACLU ran up a big legal bill. So who should pay then?

[cobalt1999]

33. Better question is why did the state spend all that government money fighting this?

If they had agreed to remove the 10 commandments at the start, there would be no legal fees.

They choose to spend money fighting this.

That's where your anger should be directed.

[Zhade]

46. It's not about being offended. It's about the ACLU spending money it shouldn't have had to to...

...to support and defend the Constitution.

[GillesDeleuze]

16. what about the people who said god was required for national security?

is that sign still up?

[Hulk]

21. GREAT!!

Now maybe KY can go to work on trying separate church and state like the rest of the nation (with it's head out of it's ass).

[Roland99]

22. This is what kills me about "Christians". They want JUDAIC laws displayed, not Jesus's teachings....

Find me one of those pseudo-Christians that can name at least two Beatitudes, much less all eight of them!

[and-justice-for-all]

27. Spot on!! nt

[pleah]

32. Good!

:thumbsup:

[Mari333]

34. and dont forget, there are 3 versions of the Ten Commandments

http://www.uctaa.net/articles/reflections/commandments/versions.html

a lot of people dont know that.

[Ian David]

35. Thou Shalt Not Violate The Wall Between Church and State, assholes. Amen. n/t

[damntexdem]

37. Thou shalt not post your religious texts in public buildings.

Hey, the ACLU can use the stimulus. ;-)

[Sultana]

38. LOL

[roseBudd]

42. You are able to read this because a newspapers has reported it

[azureblue]

43. as usual the Biblicans only want half

of the package. They want to post the Ten Commandments, but they refuse to abide by them. I say they should leave them up, but make every government official sign a pledge that, if they break any of the Ten Commandments, they will immediately leave office. I think some one should ask them if they will do this. Think there will be any takers?

[New Dawn]

44. Keep church and state SEPARATE!

[Zhade]

45. HELL YEAH! Justice!

NT!

[Manifestor_of_Light]

48. Stoning for adultery would get rid of most of the politicians, n'est ce pas??

Don't you think???


:rofl: