Old and Busted: Federal Republic, New Hotness: Theocracy

[Toad]

That thought kept me awake last night right up until my head hit the pillow. It was just.... HORRIBLE  boo hoo hoo hoo.

[Sandman]

Thanx Seagoon. So the bill would reign in the lower courts?

Seems to me that the system they have now probably speeds up the process. Imagine if the Supreme Court had to hear everything. With the current process, the Supreme Court is free to overrule any decision made by a lower court.

[Gunslinger]

yea thanks seagoon.  With a good nights sleep and a lower BAC I can actually understand that.

[ASTAC]

Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


I don't see where our government sanctioning a religon is illegal according to this text..Just saying it cannot ESTABLISH a national religon or prevent anyone from freely practicing their own religon.

Nowhere does this state that the government must be completely seperated from religon..If that was the case then a long long time ago, they would have never put "In god we trust" on our currency..much less later on add it to the allegance..or have ever put any reference to it on buildings..most built before the weenies that are whining about all this were ever born.

[Nash]

Originally posted by ASTAC
Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


I don't see where our government sanctioning a religon is illegal according to this text..Just saying it cannot ESTABLISH a national religon or prevent anyone from freely practicing their own religon.

I've seen that interpretation a few times. I may be wrong, but it seems like it's being misread.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, "

It does not say "the establishing of an." Even if it just said "the establishment of..." it would have a better shot. But it doesn't.

It says an establishment. Meaning an existing establishment. A noun, not a verb:

1 : something established : as a : a settled arrangement; especially : a code of laws b : ESTABLISHED CHURCH c : a permanent civil or military organization d : a place of business or residence with its furnishings and staff e : a public or private institution

Therefore it seems to be saying that "Congress shall make no law respecting (regarding) a church or any other establishment where religion is practiced.

Nothing about establishing a national religion or anything like that.

[storch]

Originally posted by Seagoon

[Why, oh why, do I enter into these political discussions - I must be a loon]

- SEAGOON

because you do it so well and should continue to do so.  great post.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Nash
I've seen that interpretation a few times. I may be wrong, but it seems like it's being misread.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, "

It does not say "the establishing of an." Even if it just said "the establishment of..." it would have a better shot. But it doesn't.

It says an establishment. Meaning an existing establishment. A noun, not a verb:

1 : something established : as a : a settled arrangement; especially : a code of laws b : ESTABLISHED CHURCH c : a permanent civil or military organization d : a place of business or residence with its furnishings and staff e : a public or private institution

Therefore it seems to be saying that "Congress shall make no law respecting (regarding) a church or any other establishment where religion is practiced.

Nothing about establishing a national religion or anything like that.

but then according to your statement there is no "separation of church and state" but that congress can't make laws pertaining to religion.  We all know that's not the case though, there's laws respecting a tax exemption for one.  To me the first amendment protects a cities right to place a nativity scene on govt property.  To outlaw that would be prohibiting the free exercise there of.

Same thing about not letting boy scouts use govt land for camping.  The ACLU sued many times based on the fact they claim they are a religious based organization.  Same goes for a voluntary school prayer before a football game.  That is NOT congress respecting the bla bla bla but prohibiting it is in fact a direct violation.

I don't allways get all the angles to this but I do try and see other's points of view.  Many wish to not see religious icons in public squares to avoid "offending people"  I fail to see protection against being offended any were in the constitution.