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.
Very true. Most Democrats do not respect the Constitution, so when we have a President elected that does, they go insane. They have been trying to make the Constitution irrelevant for years, and had nearly succeeded. That's why they hate Trump, who follows the Law and the Constitution.
Trump doesn't follow the laws and the Constitution. If Trump followed the laws and the Constitution, he wouldn't try to EO and tweet his way into making his desires law and the courts wouldn't have stopped his travel ban twice. Congress isn't just window dressing. It is the third branch of our government that must agree with the president's actions.
The predominant world religions of of our founding era were Christianity and Judaism, and the predominant religion in the British Colonies, later the Ameircan Colonies (after we declared our independence) was Protestantism (Christianity) and Judaism. In England, the only recognized Church was the Church of England. It was because of this that those Protestants of other sects were persecuted, and fled. This was the reason for the First Amendment's so-called "establishment clause." It is highly unlikely that they had in mind any other religion other than Christian when they wrote, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
It's doubtful that the Framers of the Constitution had any intention of protecting the Muslim Barbary Pirates, who were capturing and pillaging our ships and those of other nations, and slaughtering the crews of those ships. In fact, they would have understood Islam to be anathema to Christianity. They would not have tolerated it.
Further, most of the original State Constitutions required a profession of faith in Jesus Christ in order to hold public office. (This is a historical fact, which Leftists conveniently ignore) So, for this reason, we have a clear understanding of what the First Amendment did not mean. Liberals have been taught (incorrectly) that our founders intended to establish a secular society and a secular government, where no religion was given preference over any other. This is simply untrue. It is a blatant lie.
Lastly, our First Amendment is not a suicide pact. There is no requirement that we commit political suicide by being forced to accept and tolerate a "religion," the tenants of which are to destroy Christianity, our Western civilization, and our very way of life, in the name of "freedom of religion" (a phrase is not found in the Constitution) such as is the intent of Islam.
Islam (Muslims) hate both Christians and Jews, and is the primary source of antisemitism today. Yet the Left seem to think that our First Amendment protects this?
As for Judaism, any true Christian today (and probably those Christians of our founding era, who were readers of the Scriptures) understand that Christians are (as the bible tells us) Jews by adoption. The first Christians were Jews, and it was these Jewish Christians who were sent by God to the Gentiles, to bring the Gospel to them, and to the entire world.
Islam was never "founded" until 700 years after Christ went to the cross, and began as a cult.
Direct quote from the Qur'an
Quote:
Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
All Muslims do not hate Christians (or Jews). Islamic extremists do, but not all Muslims are extremists. Two of my doctors are Muslim. My primary doctor (a woman btw), is extremely proactive in my care, she even pesters me about losing weight and quitting smoking. If all Muslims really do hate Christians and Westerners, and by extension Americans; and want to kill us all, my doctors are going about it entirely the wrong way, ya think?
The Liar in Chief is crazy. He needs to sleep instead of tweeting in the middle of the night and start reading a book once in a while. He thinks he is a dictator and has to wake up about democracy. Quit having useless rallies, you are already president. Go to Camp David for your R&R instead of your private country club forcing taxpayers to pay even more for your security.
You can't make this stuff up....
Trump doesn't follow the laws and the Constitution. If Trump followed the laws and the Constitution, he wouldn't try to EO and tweet his way into making his desires law and the courts wouldn't have stopped his travel ban twice. Congress isn't just window dressing. It is the third branch of our government that must agree with the president's actions.
Can you give an example of anything Trump has done which is against the Constitution and our laws?
Just because a court disagreed with Trump's (legal and Constitutional) 'travel ban' does not mean their ruling was correct, or even Constitutional. In fact, it was neither. They stepped beyond their authority, and issued a ruling based on their politics and personal bias against Donald Trump, and an assumption of his intent (calling it a "Muslim ban" because they claimed that's what he intended, even though his Order did not mention "Muslim" or "Islam" at all, nor did it ban travel from all Muslim countries). They did not even consider the relevant law which gives the President the sole authority to set immigration policy (the Court doesn't have any authority over immigration policy), as described in the "Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952:, Section 212 F and codified under Title 8 USC 1182. It's pretty clear, and is unambiguous. You can read it for yourself (but you won't, because you'd rather bash Trump and support an out of control activist judge who shares your view).
The job of the Courts is not oversight of the President. That is the job of Congress, which also has responsibility for oversight of the Courts. The Congress creates the Courts (except for the Supreme Court, which is of Course created under the Constitution) and may remove judges that are acting outside of their authority. They "may hold their office during times of good behavior," the Constitution says. It does not use the phrase, "for life."
Congress is NOT the 3rd Branch of Government. Congress is The First Branch and the most powerful. The Second Branch is the Executive Branch and the second most powerful. The Third Branch is the Judicial, and the least powerful.
The Congress must not necessarily agree with the President's actions, if they are lawful. He may issue such E.O.'s as he deems necessary. The Congress does not have to agree, but it is the President's prerogative to issue such orders. Obama issued many E.O.'s as have all Presidents. Some of Obama's E.O's were unconstitutional, but they were never challenged (this is because he used E.O.'s incorrectly to change law, which usurped the Congress's law making power).
You need to study up a bit. Your knowledge is lacking.
1) I have questioned the insides and outsides of the U.S. constitution many times.
2) Show me how the courts have "stepped beyond their authority in doing so."
3) I stand corrected about what he said. Truth is I don't know what he said; I was not there to hear it. But it looks like he might have indicated only that in his view the constitution has an archaic system within it and that he doesn't approve of that. Over time plenty of people have expressed a similar sentiment, including calling the constitution a "flim-flam." But not many potuses have publicly done so, for very savvy reasons. Especially right after suffering embarrassing high profile defeats in trying to get their ignorant, whimsical way.
The Court (the several judges) stepped beyond their authority because they usurped the President's authority to set immigration policy, which is not theirs to make. The President was well within the law, which gives him sole authority for immigration policy. The court does not have to agree with it. In making their ruling, they went outside the law and based their ruling on their personal politics and biases, including their opinion of Trump, and what they think he believes. This is totally unethical for any court, which is supposed to deal in facts and the law. These judges have been harshly criticized by many Constitutional Layers, including even Alan Dershowitz for their ruling.
Can you give an example of anything Trump has done which is against the Constitution and our laws?.
1) The travel ban,you are 150% wrong.
2) Spicer yesterday said they are "looking into" changing the laws on Libel.Changing the libel laws to stop the press from attacking Trump.Not you or me, Trump.Go ahead defend taking away free speech!
The Liar in Chief is crazy. He needs to sleep instead of tweeting in the middle of the night and start reading a book once in a while. He thinks he is a dictator and has to wake up about democracy. Quit having useless rallies, you are already president. Go to Camp David for your R&R instead of your private country club forcing taxpayers to pay even more for your security.
You can't make this stuff up....
The "Liar-in-Chief" is no longer in office. He was replaced on Jan 20th, 2017.
I guarantee you, Trump does not think he is a dictator. That was the last guy also. "I won." — Barack Obama.
We are not a democracy. We are a Republic.
The rallies are not "useless." I like a President that likes to stay close to the people. That is as it should be. A King separates himself from the people and cloisters himself within his palace.
Mr. Trump conducts much business while at Mar-a-Lago, and even when he is golfing with another world leader.
Were you as critical of Barack Obama, who went golfing the day after four Americans were killed in Benghazi because of his incompetence and lack of leadership and that of his Secretary of State?
Obama wasn't making it about religion. Something specifically forbidden. How hard is this? Additionally Trumps targeted countries (bar 1) were more about being Muslim then anything else.
And since it caused issues for people currently HERE, the ruling was pretty much foregone.
Any more nonsense, or do you want to deflect from the topic more? Is it uncomfortable for you?
Please point out where in his travel ban it said "Muslim". I'm not talking about the blurb at the top written by CNN that said "Muslim", point out in that order where it was written "Muslim ban":
Am I? Prove it. I have read the law. Have you? Trump was well within his authority, and even Obama used the same law for the same purpose. Did you criticize him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by G1..
2) Spicer yesterday said they are "looking into" changing the laws on Libel.Changing the libel laws to stop the press from attacking Trump.Not you or me, Trump.Go ahead defend taking away free speech!
The Press has been walking a very fine line in terms of libel, and have made accusations with no proof.
Of course, it would have to be Congress to change the laws, and he knows that. But the laws can be changed as Congress sees fit. If they do this, and someone thinks it is unconstitutional, I expect it would be challenged. That is how our system works.
But people in the Press have damaged reputations with impunity by making claims of sexual harassment etc., with no proof (Herman Cain comes to mind, and also Clarence Thomas). The laws probably do need to be strengthened. Free speech is not without limitations.
As for "taking away free speech," do you defend what has been happening in Berkeley and on other college campuses? It isn't conservatives, nor the President, who are blocking free speech in our country.
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.
