<use_reply_addr...@spamsights.org> wrote: >In message ><8d589d4a-838f-4314-80bc-37ad32de9...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, >All-Seeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> writes >>There is a bigger picture to be considered here. The European Court of >>Human Rights is located in Strasbourg, Germany.The complaint was in >>Italy made by someone that was born in Finland. So we have 2 outside >>entities telling the population of Italy to change the way it has >>lived for a couple thousands of years.
>It's not a "couple thousands of year", the web site that was quoted >clearly says:
>"The law requiring crucifixes to be hung in schools dates back to the >1920s. "
That doesn't mean they weren't hanging them is schools before that. On the other hand, Italy didn't exist until the late 19th century, and public/state schools aren't much older than that.
Gien the date, it might have been by act of the Fascists.
-- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatu...@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:12:25 +0000, Sapient Fridge
> <use_reply_addr...@spamsights.org> wrote: > >In message > ><8d589d4a-838f-4314-80bc-37ad32de9...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > >All-Seeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> writes > >>There is a bigger picture to be considered here. The European Court of > >>Human Rights is located in Strasbourg, Germany.The complaint was in > >>Italy made by someone that was born in Finland. So we have 2 outside > >>entities telling the population of Italy to change the way it has > >>lived for a couple thousands of years.
> >It's not a "couple thousands of year", the web site that was quoted > >clearly says:
> >"The law requiring crucifixes to be hung in schools dates back to the > >1920s. "
> That doesn't mean they weren't hanging them is schools before > that. On the other hand, Italy didn't exist until the late 19th > century, and public/state schools aren't much older than that.
> Gien the date, it might have been by act of the Fascists.
Oh, it was. In 1924, by Mussolini. Not just in schools, but all government buildings. He also reintroduced the Catechism into primary school education in the same law. It was part of his ploy to get the Acerbo law passed, for which he needed suport of at least soem of the catholic MPs - on the one hand, increasing violende against moderate Catholic organisations (and dropping the remaining populari ministers in his Cabinet) while at the same time offering the right wing hardliners what they had wanted: Catholic school education, symbols in government buildings, outlawing of Free Masons and a promise to solve the "Roman question" (which would happen later in the Lateran Treaty that established the Vatican as state and made catholicism state religion in Italy) In return, the Pope banned priests from joining or endorsing the catholic party, which as a result split and delivered the vote Mussolini needed. Cardinal Vannutelli, Head of the Sacred College of Cardinals, said thank you thus: "for his energetic devotion to his country," adding that the Duce "had been chosen (by God) to save the nation and to restore her fortune."
His daughter who now active in a neo-fascist party was one of the first to condemn the Strassbourg ruling
Burkhard wrote: > On 7 Nov, 18:05, Hatunen <hatu...@cox.net> wrote: >> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:12:25 +0000, Sapient Fridge
>> <use_reply_addr...@spamsights.org> wrote: >> >In message >> ><8d589d4a-838f-4314-80bc-37ad32de9...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, >> >All-Seeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> writes >> >>There is a bigger picture to be considered here. The European Court of >> >>Human Rights is located in Strasbourg, Germany.The complaint was in >> >>Italy made by someone that was born in Finland. So we have 2 outside >> >>entities telling the population of Italy to change the way it has >> >>lived for a couple thousands of years.
>> >It's not a "couple thousands of year", the web site that was quoted >> >clearly says:
>> >"The law requiring crucifixes to be hung in schools dates back to the >> >1920s. "
>> That doesn't mean they weren't hanging them is schools before >> that. On the other hand, Italy didn't exist until the late 19th >> century, and public/state schools aren't much older than that.
>> Gien the date, it might have been by act of the Fascists.
> Oh, it was. In 1924, by Mussolini. Not just in schools, but all > government buildings. He also reintroduced the Catechism into primary > school education in the same law. It was part of his ploy to get the > Acerbo law passed, for which he needed suport of at least soem of the > catholic MPs - on the one hand, increasing violende against moderate > Catholic organisations (and dropping the remaining populari ministers > in his Cabinet) while at the same time offering the right wing > hardliners what they had wanted: Catholic school education, symbols in > government buildings, outlawing of Free Masons and a promise to solve > the "Roman question" (which would happen later in the Lateran Treaty > that established the Vatican as state and made catholicism state > religion in Italy) In return, the Pope banned priests from joining or > endorsing the catholic party, which as a result split and delivered > the vote Mussolini needed. Cardinal Vannutelli, Head of the Sacred > College of Cardinals, said thank you thus: "for his energetic > devotion to his country," adding that the Duce "had been chosen (by > God) to save the nation and to restore her fortune."
> His daughter who now active in a neo-fascist party was one of the > first to condemn the Strassbourg ruling
You surly mean his granddaughter, Alessandra Mussolini?
>> On 7 Nov, 18:05, Hatunen <hatu...@cox.net> wrote: >>> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:12:25 +0000, Sapient Fridge
>>> <use_reply_addr...@spamsights.org> wrote: >>>> In message >>>> <8d589d4a-838f-4314-80bc-37ad32de9...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, >>>> All-Seeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> writes >>>>> There is a bigger picture to be considered here. The European >>>>> Court of Human Rights is located in Strasbourg, Germany.The >>>>> complaint was in Italy made by someone that was born in >>>>> Finland. So we have 2 outside entities telling the population >>>>> of Italy to change the way it has lived for a couple >>>>> thousands of years. >>>> It's not a "couple thousands of year", the web site that was >>>> quoted clearly says: "The law requiring crucifixes to be hung >>>> in schools dates back to the 1920s. " >>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8340411.stm >>> That doesn't mean they weren't hanging them is schools before >>> that. On the other hand, Italy didn't exist until the late 19th >>> century, and public/state schools aren't much older than that.
>>> Gien the date, it might have been by act of the Fascists.
>> Oh, it was. In 1924, by Mussolini. Not just in schools, but all >> government buildings. He also reintroduced the Catechism into >> primary school education in the same law. It was part of his ploy >> to get the Acerbo law passed, for which he needed suport of at >> least soem of the catholic MPs - on the one hand, increasing >> violende against moderate Catholic organisations (and dropping the >> remaining populari ministers in his Cabinet) while at the same time >> offering the right wing hardliners what they had wanted: Catholic >> school education, symbols in government buildings, outlawing of >> Free Masons and a promise to solve the "Roman question" (which >> would happen later in the Lateran Treaty that established the >> Vatican as state and made catholicism state religion in Italy) In >> return, the Pope banned priests from joining or endorsing the >> catholic party, which as a result split and delivered the vote >> Mussolini needed. Cardinal Vannutelli, Head of the Sacred College >> of Cardinals, said thank you thus: "for his energetic devotion to >> his country," adding that the Duce "had been chosen (by God) to >> save the nation and to restore her fortune."
>> His daughter who now active in a neo-fascist party was one of the >> first to condemn the Strassbourg ruling
> You surly mean his granddaughter, Alessandra Mussolini?
oops ;o) Alessandra indeed, daughter of Romano Mussolini
> On Nov 6, 4:51 pm, chris thompson <chris.linthomp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 9:50 am, All-Seeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 5, 10:15 pm, chris thompson <chris.linthomp...@gmail.com> > > > wrote:> On Nov 5, 9:18 pm, All-seeing-I <ap...@email.com> wrote:
> > > []
> > > > > The U.N.
> > > > Nonsense. The UN has its own human rights courts in The Hague. And > > > > yes, we are technically (and we should be) subordinate to those- since > > > > that's what we agreed to when we signed the UN Charter. In fact, the > > > > US has always ignored the rulings of the UN courts when such rulings > > > > found against us, but the US Govt has screamed bloody murder when > > > > other nations blow off the same courts.
> > > Why not throw the constitution out while you are at it?
> > Dude, I am the one following the constitution. The US Constitution > > clearly states that the highest law of the land is twofold: there is > > the US Constitution, and _equal to the Constitution in all regards_ > > are international treaties.
> international treaties? Are you outa your mind?
Guess you skipped school the three years they had civics classes, eh?
Burkhard <b.scha...@ed.ac.uk> wrote: > On 7 Nov, 15:00, nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote: > > Burkhard <b.scha...@ed.ac.uk> wrote: > > > chris thompson wrote: > > > > "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be > > > > made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be > > > > made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme > > > > Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, > > > > any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary > > > > notwithstanding."
> > > > Chris > > > > snip
> > > Unfortunately, as so often in law, things are more difficult than common > > > sense woudl dictate - in this case, the SCOTUS precedents go in the > > > other way. See in particular Breard v. Greene, 523 U.S. 371 (1998),which > > > affirmed that Senate ratified treaty may be overridden by a later > > > domestic statute enacted by mere majorities in each house of Congress.
> > > The US was always a "dualist" jurisdiction with regards to international > > > law, and in cases like this it shows.
> > In short, the USA is an unreliable party to treaties, > > in particular treaties that the next president may dislike,
> > Jan
> The UK is in this sense in a worse position: "Parliament can't bind > Parliament" is one of the first principles of constitutional law. So > in theory, Parliament could revoke e.g. the independence granted to > Canada in the Statute of Westminster - what the Canadians would say > about this is of course another matter, somehow I feel it would not > be: "Fair enough"....
> But that changes nothing. A cross is meaningless > to anyone that does not believe in the principals > behind the cross.
And so it is merely by coincidence that the KKK burned/burns crosses, as opposed say to mere stakes or piles of wood, in the lawns of those they meant/mean to terrorize, whether their victims were/are known to be christians or not?
You are, as always, an utter and unrelenting fool.
|
