Governor Walker charging 50 bucks to protest.

[Rageaholic]

And also requires a permit.

More here.

How is this even constitutional?

[Duelist925]

That...that. What? I think I hurt my brain.

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

Because...Fuck the First Amendment, that's why!

[FArchivist]

And also requires a permit.

More here.

How is this even constitutional?

U.S. court decisions have determined that the government, federal or state, may regulate the time, place, and manner of expression. They can't tell what to say or make any decisions based on the content, but in order to prevent disruption of public functions (such as blocking streets), they have the ability to require permits and so on before you may assemble. It's the same thing that allows "Free Speech Zones" to be constitutional.

[BlaqueKatt]

according to NPR/WPR(wisconsin public radio) friday morning it was done to stop the group that was coming to protest the lighting of the Tree, and Walker's trying to rename it by law the Christmas tree, in 1985 it was renamed the holiday tree to establish the separation of Church and state, and it has been ensconced in WI law as such, he is trying to tear down the wall of separation, and elevate Christianity above other religions.

[Greenday]

according to NPR/WPR(wisconsin public radio) friday morning it was done to stop the group that was coming to protest the lighting of the Tree, and Walker's trying to rename it by law the Christmas tree, in 1985 it was renamed the holiday tree to establish the separation of Church and state, and it has been ensconced in WI law as such, he is trying to tear down the wall of separation, and elevate Christianity above other religions.

God forbid a Christmas tree be called by its actual name.

And hey, since it's perfectly legal...then whatever. $50 isn't asking much.

[Andara Bledin]

God forbid a Christmas tree be called by its actual name.

Cute.

Nevermind that Christianity stole it in the first place from other religions entirely and it's pretty much a modern convention within Christianity itself.

^-.-^

[blas87]

He didn't want protestors interrupting the lighting of the capital tree. And honestly, something like that, stay outside and do your bitching like good little protestors have been. Out in the rain and snow, hoping someone will pay attention to you and sign your stupid petitions to recall the very person you voted for a year ago.

[BlaqueKatt]

God forbid a Christmas tree be called by its actual name.

why ever would that be a problem oh yeah

the First Amendment provision that prohibits the federal and state governments from establishing an official religion, or from favoring or disfavoring one view of religion over another

Which is why BY LAW, it is the holiday tree, Walker is trying to override the establishment clause of the US consitiution-that pesky separation of church and state thing, don't force your religion on anyone unless you're perfectly ok with having someone else's religious beliefs forced on you if some other religious group becomes the majority. Seems to me as an Atheist calling it a Christmas tree is favoring Christianity over say Islam or Judaism now isn't it?

And hey, since it's perfectly legal...then whatever. $50 isn't asking much.

know how I know you didn't read the article?

Protestors would pay in advance to stage an event, at a cost of $50 per hour, per Capitol Police officer

If they really wanted to discourage a group, they could call in 100 officers for an hour or two, as it doesn't say how many officers per protestor are required.

sign your stupid petitions to recall the very person you voted for a year ago.

no they didn't bother to vote for whatever reason,

total registered voters in WI 3,469,443,
2,158,974 votes were cast(walker only won by 124,638 votes
number of registered voters that didn't vote-1,310,469 voter turnout was around 60%, turnout for the primary elections and recall elections was between 10%-30%, and that's considered a HIGH turnout-

compare that to the 2008 presidential election with 2,954,852 votes cast, only 514,591 didn't vote

twice as many voters decided to not vote when it was merely congress, senate, and governor.

[Panacea]

A Christmas Tree has no business being part of the Christian holiday anyway, since it is a pagan ritual (from the old Yule Log).

I don't care if it is called a holiday tree in legalese. To me the private citizen it's a Christmas Tree, I don't care if it has nothing to do with Christianity and is a modern invention.

I simply enjoy them for what they are. Who give's a rat's ass about the name when it's the spirit of giving you're celebrating?

[Andara Bledin]

Who give's a rat's ass about the name when it's the spirit of giving you're celebrating?

Mostly people who want to shove that their religion has a favored position with the legislation down other people's throats.

And people who just don't understand what separation of church and state really means. People who don't get that the promotion of a single religion by the government is just as bad as the oppression of any religion by same.

I'm Christian, and unless they start including other solstice-based observances to the table, they need to stop observing one that is specifically declared to be Christian. Leaving the label off opens the observance up to include far more faiths as the whole "evergreen to represent the eternal cycle of life" is fairly widespread.

^-.-^

[HYHYBT]

know how I know you didn't read the article?

Not necessarily. It's very easy, in this case, to misread "per" as its other meaning of "according to," especially if you already think you know what it's saying (because, perhaps, you'd read the title of this thread.) A more careful reading shows that that would be a very odd way of writing…. but then, it still could fall in the category of an editing error.

I'm Christian, and unless they start including other solstice-based observances to the table, they need to stop observing one that is specifically declared to be Christian. Leaving the label off opens the observance up to include far more faiths as the whole "evergreen to represent the eternal cycle of life" is fairly widespread.

Or we could recognize the split that already largely exists: Christmas as a holy day honoring Christ's birth, and Christmas the *essentially* secular holiday about time with family, gift-giving (not gift-gifting!), greenery, lights, fake snow, etc. They overlap, for those who want them to, but many do celebrate the latter with no consideration for the former at all, and without thinking of the name's origin.

[Andara Bledin]

The split is irrelevant. You cannot have Christmas without invoking the Christian religion.

And if you recognize the split, then there should be no complaint about calling it a holiday tree.

^-.-^

[blas87]

Well, all of you non-Christians better be calling your gifts "Holiday gifts", if you don't want us Christians ruining your right to not believe.

Good thing the politically correct police and the Atheists won't go after me for believing in a good Festivus pole.

[BlaqueKatt]

Well, all of you non-Christians better be calling your gifts "Holiday gifts", if you don't want us Christians ruining your right to not believe.

actually we give solstice/christmas gifts in my husband's family(mix of pagans and christians), I just give gifts without a specific attachment to any holiday. and his family has both a yule log and a christmas tree....if I requested a festivus pole, they'd put one up for me