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.
Your "otherwise" is a false assumption. Objectivity does not lie in references cited to validate a position. Objectivity lies in simple logic. I've explained the simple logic that is the foundation of the decision. If the desired result is religion not being legislated, then religion can not take part in legislation. Simple logic.
Gotcha, no support, just your "simple logic". No need to validate, you are right. /boggle
So you advocate legislating from the bench, violating the oath of their position and disregarding the constitution. And they wonder why so many people fear progressive agendas.
And another person who doesn't understand Common law.
Roysoldboy is correct. Since Congress "shall make no law", no law made by Congress applies. If you can locate that part of the Constitution that authorizes the judicial branch to legislate in place of Congress, I'd love to read it.
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Roysoldboy is correct. Since Congress "shall make no law", no law made by Congress applies. If you can locate that part of the Constitution that authorizes the judicial branch to legislate in place of Congress, I'd love to read it.
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Roysoldboy is correct. Since Congress "shall make no law", no law made by Congress applies. If you can locate that part of the Constitution that authorizes the judicial branch to legislate in place of Congress, I'd love to read it.
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Yes, but the 14th amendment is part of the constitution...
Correct, but as was noted, the 14th amendment does not work with the argument you are making. We already mentioned this, which led to the court issue, which led us back to here again (ie we are going in circles).
Everyone seems to agree that Congress cannot inhibit an individual's right to practice their religion (free exercise clause). But there has been a debate on whether the Establishment Clause prevents government from either inhibiting or advancing a particular religion.
What say you?
My belief: Congress can neither inhibit nor advance a particular religion and that establishes a wall of separation between church and state.
Congress cannot inhibit nor advance any religion, that I would agree with.
It hasn't exactly stopped them from inhibiting and advancing though. Government has gone after numerous religious groups for various reasons. Sometimes the reasons are completely contrived, sometimes I think they have good reasons. The government does a lousy job of upholding its end of the bargain and leaving religions alone. And the notion that government can't meddle with the affairs of religion and religion can't meddle with the affairs of government also falls apart whenever there are calls to tax religions. If government has to leave religion completely alone, then they don't get to levy taxes against them -- that's breaking the rules.
Now I don't think that separation of religion and government means eliminating all religion from the public space. It means that the government cannot favor any religion or non-religion above all others. Here to, the government gets it wrong. If you are going to teach something in school, there must be a degree of sensitivity to religion. If you want to teach something as academic fact that completely contradicts any one religion's beliefs, then you probably shouldn't teach it at all, or at least you must allow parents to opt out if they choose. You can teach students about religion certainly -- teaching history without it is insanity. Religious history is so intertwined with the historical record that you can't teach one without the other. But you cannot proselytize at school and you cannot teach that any one religious belief-set is right.
Elimination of all vestiges of religion in the public space is pushing the agenda of atheism with extreme bias and should not be tolerated. Only so long as all religions are welcomed in the public space then the ideal of "neither inhibiting nor advancing any particular religion" is achieved.
Correct, but as was noted, the 14th amendment does not work with the argument you are making. We already mentioned this, which led to the court issue, which led us back to here again (ie we are going in circles).
The issue might be settled for you, but for momonkey, it apparently was not.
So would you be ok with the state governments not needing a warrant to enter your home or restricting your freedom of speech?
"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, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
Gotcha, no support, just your "simple logic". No need to validate, you are right. /boggle
So you advocate legislating from the bench, violating the oath of their position and disregarding the constitution. And they wonder why so many people fear progressive agendas.
Didn't advocate legislating from the bench, or any such violations. Your blatant attempt to discredit me, rather than actually argue the point, only showcases your weakness. If that simple logic is flawed, then argue that it is flawed, and tell us how. Otherwise, you've lost the argument.
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.
