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.
This country, and any country really, would be better off without Islam.
And discrimination already exists in this country and has been sanctioned by the supreme court. University admissions are the most prominent example.
The same could be said of any religion. Or of religion in general. That doesn't mean that we should ban freedom of religion.
The same could be said of any religion. Or of religion in general. That doesn't mean that we should ban freedom of religion.
Well, I don't know. I went to a Catholic grade school, the nuns always had us doing things to help the poor. Plus the schools themselves served a good function, keeping us out of the city schools. The devout Catholics weren't doing anything bad, that I could ever see.
The Constitution applies to the people who fall within the jurisdiction of that Constitution. If you live in Georgia, you fall within the jurisdiction of the United States Constitution. Which means the protections guaranteed in the US Constitution extend to you. As Freedom of Religion is one of those protections, no state can deny a person that Freedom of Religion. When a city within a state arbitrarily chooses to restrict a church within its jurisdiction, it's possibly violating the Constitutional rights of its citizens. If a citizen sues, the city must prove what interests outweigh freedom of religion, and it must prove that its actions do not target one specific religion. Its actions must be consistently applied. The ability of a city to discriminate against one group of citizens on behalf of the majority of its citizens is not an interest that outweighs freedom of religion. And since we know one church has been allowed in a retail space, we know that the city is not acting consistently towards all religions, but is in fact targeting one religion in particular. Therefore, the Constitutional rights of the people who follow that one religion in particular are being violated.
Yes, the Constitution clearly outlines what we the people demand of them the government of the USA, but not my state. My State Constitution clearly outlines what we the people of my state, demand from my States government.
The US Constitution and my States Constitution, protect the same rights, but the state gets to define them further and always has.
My State would never have needed a Constitution, if the US Constitution was the law of the land for all government.
Why have a US 10th Amendment? There are specific things the 1st-8th amendments say the federal government cannot do. The 10th says those thing are left to the individual states. Remember it was men from each of the colonies(states) that composed the US Constitution & ratified it.
Yes, the Constitution clearly outlines what we the people demand of them the government of the USA, but not my state. My State Constitution clearly outlines what we the people of my state, demand from my States government.
The US Constitution and my States Constitution, protect the same rights, but the state gets to define them further and always has.
My State would never have needed a Constitution, if the US Constitution was the law of the land for all government.
That's your (incorrect) opinion. The law is interpreted differently by the courts.
You stating your minority view matter-of-factly makes it seem as if it's conventional wisdom. It isn't. It's a minority view and it won't win in court. If Kennesaw gets sued, Kennesaw will lose, your poor understanding of the law notwithstanding.
Well, I don't know. I went to a Catholic grade school, the nuns always had us doing things to help the poor. Plus the schools themselves served a good function, keeping us out of the city schools. The devout Catholics weren't doing anything bad, that I could ever see.
No, because today secular law constrains them.
A look at catholic history will show, though, that nothing in their religion constrains bad behavior. They did, after all, burn people alive *as a favor to those being burned.* Their "holy" scripture told them so.
Would today's catholics do those things? No, the overwhelming majority would not. But that is because the catholic church was forced by outsiders to change if it wanted to survive - not because the hierarchy woke up one morning, slapped itself upside the head, and realized it had been all wrong about certain things.
(I am genuinely glad you dodged the pedophilia though.)
Yes, the Constitution clearly outlines what we the people demand of them the government of the USA, but not my state. My State Constitution clearly outlines what we the people of my state, demand from my States government.
The US Constitution and my States Constitution, protect the same rights, but the state gets to define them further and always has.
My State would never have needed a Constitution, if the US Constitution was the law of the land for all government.
Why have a US 10th Amendment? There are specific things the 1st-8th amendments say the federal government cannot do. The 10th says those thing are left to the individual states. Remember it was men from each of the colonies(states) that composed the US Constitution & ratified it.
Your State Constitution does not supersede the federal Constitution. No state's constitution can take away rights guaranteed by the US Constitution.
A look at catholic history will show, though, that nothing in their religion constrains bad behavior. They did, after all, burn people alive *as a favor to those being burned.* Their "holy" scripture told them so.
Would today's catholics do those things? No, the overwhelming majority would not. But that is because the catholic church was forced by outsiders to change if it wanted to survive - not because the hierarchy woke up one morning, slapped itself upside the head, and realized it had been all wrong about certain things.
(I am genuinely glad you dodged the pedophilia though.)
Yeah well, maybe you have a time machine and just got back from the 1500s or whatever, but I live in the year 2014, so that's what I'm talking about.
If "the public" really wants to pay the costs of a grand-standing lawsuit that they're sure to lose and enrich the Muslim community in the process, I guess that's democracy in action. Sounds weird to me, but thn again I don't live in Kennesaw, a fact that I'm probably not grateful enough for.
Not even a Christian Church can move into that location, because the people have spoken.
Where's the beef?
The neighborhood doesn't want that there.
The same could be said of any religion. Or of religion in general. That doesn't mean that we should ban freedom of religion.
No one is banning any religion. Even if Georgia has it's own constitution and definition of freedom of(not from) religion.
It doesn't violate State Constitution, not to allow a religious venue in that location.
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.
