Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Carroll is merely trying to do some symbolic constitutional housecleaning, but it won't be easy.
In 2005, state Rep. Buddy Blair filed a resolution to affirm Arkansas' support for the separation of church and state. The resolution lost 39-44 in the House.
Meanwhile, in a related story, the Arkansas House passed a bill Wednesday allowing people to bring their guns to church.
Article 6, Section 3 states in part: ". . . but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
I don't know what's scarier: that these backwater laws still exist completely illegally or that people today, such as the above poster, defend them.
Article 6, Section 3 states in part: ". . . but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
I don't know what's scarier: that these backwater laws still exist completely illegally or that people today, such as the above poster, defend them.
Any religion that believes in a deity, obviously. Patently unconstitutional and I hope someone gets all over this one with the ACLU.
It is not establishing a religion, though, is it? Nor is it preventing a religion from being practiced, is it? Unless you consider atheism to be a religion...
It is not establishing a religion, though, is it? Nor is it preventing a religion from being practiced, is it? Unless you consider atheism to be a religion...
We've already discussed this before. The Supreme Court has ruled that even though atheism is not a religion, it falls under the broad umbrella of religious discrimination if you discriminate against someone for being an atheist. It's just easier in terms of law to put religion and non-religion under the same protection, because otherwise imagine all the money and time that would be spent adding atheist-specific laws to the books that read just like the ones protecting you and your religious beliefs.
Your sarcastic sympathetic statement makes it sound as though you really don’t care who’s rights are being violated, as long as they aren’t yours.
This may not exactly be defending it, but it is obvious that you don’t have an issue with it being discriminatory against a particular group of people.
Your sarcastic sympathetic statement makes it sound as though you really don’t care who’s rights are being violated, as long as they aren’t yours.
This may not exactly be defending it, but it is obvious that you don’t have an issue with it being discriminatory against a particular group of people.
I have a hard time feeling sorry for atheists whining....sorry. Atheists today tend to be rather rude and obnoxious to Christians. Perhaps I should have been a little more diplomatic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Patently unconstitutional and I hope someone gets all over this one with the ACLU.
