Memos
-
news
cocklebur blog
Archives
- October 2008 (9)
- September 2008 (21)
- August 2008 (30)
- July 2008 (26)
- June 2008 (24)
- May 2008 (25)
- April 2008 (23)
- March 2008 (26)
- February 2008 (31)
- January 2008 (19)
- December 2007 (1)
- November 2007 (4)
- October 2007 (9)
- September 2007 (7)
- August 2007 (5)
- July 2007 (4)
- June 2007 (14)
- May 2007 (30)
- April 2007 (16)
- March 2007 (12)
- February 2007 (18)
- January 2007 (13)
- December 2006 (13)
- November 2006 (5)
- October 2006 (11)
- September 2006 (6)
- August 2006 (1)
- July 2006 (1)
- June 2006 (9)
- May 2006 (20)
- April 2006 (16)
- March 2006 (12)
- February 2006 (9)
- January 2006 (4)
- December 2005 (4)
- October 2005 (2)
- September 2005 (2)
- August 2005 (1)
- July 2005 (5)
- June 2005 (4)
- May 2005 (1)
- April 2005 (3)
- November 2004 (6)
- May 2003 (1)
- April 2003 (2)
- March 2003 (2)
- 0 (1)
-
Recent Comments
- Sue Westberry on free bbq with Sen. Jim DeMint
- Sue Westberry on pact meeting 10.09 @ 4:30 pm
- AndersonMan on if i go mac will i come back?
- Sen. Kevin L. Bryant on free bbq with Sen. Jim DeMint
- Sen. Kevin L. Bryant on a great debate
- Lay64 on a great debate
- Nikki Waldsmith on S. 127 Age of Consent Debate
- Dr. M&M on free bbq with Sen. Jim DeMint
- Sen. Kevin L. Bryant on free bbq with Sen. Jim DeMint
- Hungry on free bbq with Sen. Jim DeMint
- Art Kaldas on livid in Powdersville
- Tom Delay on livid in Powdersville
- Art Kaldas on debate question: roads
- Art Kaldas on the storm is here!
- Art Kaldas on Bowen vs. Dobbins (by Art Kaldas)
i believe we’re going to court
A predicted court challenge has been issued on the “I Believe” license tag recently passed by the Legislature. As you know, Governor Sanford did not sign this bill, yet allowed it to pass into law without his signature citing the court challenge would occur. Senator Yancy McGill (D-Williamsburg) introduced this bill and I signed on as a cosponsor. The problem I have with this lawsuit is that the state is not forcing this plate on anyone, simply offering it as a choice. I can’t imagine how this license plate can be interpreted as the establishment of Religion and unconstitutional. Besides, the constitutional amendment referring to the establishment of religion is directed towards congress, not the states. Unfortunately, liberal activist judges have stretched the first constitutional amendment requirement to apply to all government entities.Interestingly, I’ve been approached by 2 news outlets from Yew York concerning this issue on 3 occasions. The NY Times called twice (once on 06.19.08 and quoted me)
I guess I’d have to admit I could support a plate for the Jewish community, yet would be very uncomfortable with a plate for scientology. This is inconsistent, I’ll admit. Anyhoo, this issue is out of our hands, so let’s wait and see what the courts and Attorney General Henry McMaster decide.
I couldn’t find a picture of the South Carolina plate, but here’s a sample of what we may see on Florida plates:

June 23rd, 2008 at 10:50 am
How would you feel about a secular humanist license plate?