PDA

View Full Version : Court Upholds 'In God We Trust' Plate


triadboy
17th November 2008, 01:38 PM
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/17999573/detail.html

The court ruled that the "In God We Trust" plate, along with another, "Lincoln's Boyhood Home," are simply alternatives to the standard plate and that the fact that motorists who choose them aren't subject to the additional fee is not arbitrary.

Is this slimey to anyone else? Why are xians hell-bent on sticking God all up in our faces?

The first misprint will be "God's Boyhood Home"

“So often when there is a reference to a supreme being in the public arena, objections are made. With the court’s ruling, those objections have failed and the Legislature's will has been sustained."

Can I get a different 'simple alternative'...like "All Hail Kang!"?

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
17th November 2008, 02:13 PM
I'm sorry, but the ACLU wasted everyone's time and money. If that's the biggest example of government respecting an establishment of religion, then we're all done with that problem.

~~ Paul

Third Eye Open
17th November 2008, 02:31 PM
I agree, this is no problem, as long as I have the choice not to have it on my plate, I don't care.

Marquis de Carabas
17th November 2008, 02:44 PM
Meh. I'm fresh out of outrage. I'm expecting a new shipment early next year; talk to me then.

Silentknight
17th November 2008, 04:35 PM
That article is incomplete because it fails to mention the incident where the "In God We Trust" license plate detached from a car after a collision and decapitated several bystanders.

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
17th November 2008, 04:54 PM
Marquis, I'm sorry, but General Outrage, Inc., is about to go out of business.

~~ Paul

pgwenthold
18th November 2008, 05:03 AM
How about the fact that the BMV was sending these plates to car owners by default (they ran out of other plates), and then charging to have them substituted out?

There are reports of that happening.

I disagree that this is "no big deal." If it weren't such a big deal, why did the state fight so dang hard to continue it? They could have real easily switched to charging a processing fee like they do with all their other specialized plates, but instead fought to preserve the government subsidy. Apparently, it matters to them.

Beerina
19th November 2008, 09:54 AM
Are the other specialty plates that they do charge an extra $15 for "similarly structured"? Does "In God We Trust" just change a little text line? What about the other specialty plates?

I guess they didn't need to add "Home of Lincoln" as the license plate equivalent of a Santa next to a Baby Jesus. But best to be sure when you're a lying, deceiving Christian.


Because the Christians who do this most certainly are lying that it isn't done because it's religion, and they know it.

triadboy
19th November 2008, 11:33 AM
Are the other specialty plates that they do charge an extra $15 for "similarly structured"? Does "In God We Trust" just change a little text line? What about the other specialty plates?


I think this applies to the 'plain-Jane' license plates that States offer. For instance, Arizona is "Grand Canyon State". So - for example - for no extra money I could get that replaced with "Where God - and His Holy Wang - writes His name in the rocks with the fluid of the Colorado River"

NobbyNobbs
19th November 2008, 12:14 PM
The first misprint will be "God's Boyhood Home"




And the second will be "In Lincoln We Trust".

GreyICE
19th November 2008, 12:42 PM
I could be outraged... but it would take so much energy. And I just don't care.

This is a small battle. They can have their license plates.

Gregory
19th November 2008, 12:45 PM
Somehow, life goes on.

quixotecoyote
19th November 2008, 10:29 PM
Do the people who opposed this get to say "I told you so" when this is used as a precedent in a meaningful case?

shadron
19th November 2008, 10:53 PM
Just another way to wring an extra $15 out of the typical style-conscious lunkhead. I'll have that with a "XNURULS", please.

Oops, I see I got that wrong. Then they want to do it just for the sake of Chrisian chariy , godliness and their own immortal souls? Wow. I'll bet god is impressed. It's like a built in plastic Jesus on the dashboard.

X
19th November 2008, 11:05 PM
I agree, this is no problem, as long as I have the choice not to have it on my plate, I don't care.


And that's the crux of the issue.

It's not forcing their beliefs on others, any more than wearing a hijab of turban or cross necklace is.

If it were the only plate available, there would be a problem. But it isn't.

autumn1971
19th November 2008, 11:16 PM
In Florida one can opt to have plate with a "Choose Life" slogan. I don't really think that those who opt for the plate are rabid Wham! fans, so I can only assume that it is a reflection of religious views. I would have no problem if the state offered an "abortion saves lives and benefits society" plate, but they do not.
They even offer a (shudder) FSU plate!?!?
Who could possibly want that?

autumn1971
19th November 2008, 11:37 PM
Being serious for a moment, does the explicit state acknowledgement of a god deny me my right not to believe? No. But the existece of a god being endorsed by the state is not balanced by the merely secular nature of the other choices.
A license plate that does not nod to a god is not equivilant to one that nods to a particular god. If a plate was availiable with a "no god is needed for me to be free" slogan, I would be without a complaint, but I imagine that there would be complaints from those upon whom some small form of equality was seen as a threat to be opposed.
Secular government, which US law indicates the government should be, is not atheist, nor should it ever be, but it is secular; it does not acknowledge god, gods, goddesses, or super-turnips, and it does not deny them, or their believers, of equal participation. Any state-issued license-plate endorsing a god is an endorsement of some set of non-secular beliefs, and is an implied admission of the higher status of those believers. If every other belief system were given the same treatment, there would be no problem, but we can all see that such a system would collapse under the weight of it's own citizens.
Government in America is secular (not atheist), and for damn good reasons.

UnrepentantSinner
20th November 2008, 12:04 AM
I'm with the "personally it's irksome but meh" crowd on this one.

Do the people who opposed this get to say "I told you so" when this is used as a precedent in a meaningful case?

Care to flesh out this hypothetical and offer a scenario where this decision might come into play?

Uncayimmy
20th November 2008, 12:37 AM
Here's the link to the complaint:
http://www.aclu-in.org/upload/newsletters/LicensePlateComplaint.pdf

It was not a First Amendment argument. It was based on Article 1, Sec 23 of the Indiana Constitution:
The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.

Thus, environmentalists have to pay, but god trusters do not. I wish I could have found the opinion.

Dancing David
20th November 2008, 05:07 AM
C'mon people it is Indiana!

:D

Dancing David
20th November 2008, 05:10 AM
Here's the link to the complaint:
http://www.aclu-in.org/upload/newsletters/LicensePlateComplaint.pdf

It was not a First Amendment argument. It was based on Article 1, Sec 23 of the Indiana Constitution:


Thus, environmentalists have to pay, but god trusters do not. I wish I could have found the opinion.


Quite right, I heard that the basis of the decision was that the legislature had the right to create a seperate track of 'base' plates and that therefore they were not vanity plates.

Gregory
20th November 2008, 06:39 AM
Thus, environmentalists have to pay, but god trusters do not. I wish I could have found the opinion.

Here you are (http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11170804mgr.pdf) Nothing particularly fascinating, at least to my non-legally trained mind.

Dancing David
20th November 2008, 01:06 PM
Conclusion
The General Assembly’s classification of license plates as chapter 25 and non-chapter 25 license plates is reasonably related to the inherent characteristics of the license plates. In addition, the requirement of paying the administrative fee is equally applicable to all chapter 25 license plates and does not apply to any non-chapter 25 license plates. Therefore, we hold that Indiana Code sections 9-18-24.5-4 and 9-29-5-34.5, offering the “In God We Trust” license plate without the requirement of paying the administrative fee, are constitutional.


Thats the basis...

LarianLeQuella
21st November 2008, 06:31 AM
I'm with the "personally it's irksome but meh" crowd on this one.


QFT.

/snark It would be amusing to see a Muslim go in and demand an Allah plate and see them react! It is Indiana though, so he may fear for his life as a result of that.

bokonon
19th December 2008, 07:24 PM
In other news, production of the South Carolina "I Believe" license plate has been halted (http://www.au.org/site/DocServer/I_Believe_preliminary_injunction_12-11-08.pdf%20%20%20%20%20%20?docID=3521) by U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie.