- May 25, 2005
- Reaction score
- Milwaukee, Wisconsin
- Political Leaning
What's your point?Arthur Fonzarelli said:
The writer of the article is either ignorant (hopefully) or lying to give cause to his position (probably). Judge Moore's monument was moved because Judge Moore refused to allow any other religious iconography in the rotunda. He purposefully and vocally denounced allowance of other religions and would only allow the 10 Commandments there and that is promotion of the government of one religion over another. That, is illegal. That is also not mentioned in the article because it sure wouldn't make a good argument.You see, Judge Thompson had determined that the monument violated the First Amendment's "Establishment Clause," which says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
"Congress shall make no law." Thompson never did explain how a granite display of the 10 Commandments in a courthouse constituted Congress "making a law."
Really? I call BS again. The decision by the US Supreme Court of Elewski vs. Syracuse stayed the allowance of a creche on public grounds.But that didn't matter. Somehow, though the vast majority of Americans are repulsed by it, a virulent and increasingly pervasive legal theory of the First Amendment holds that Christmas manger scenes must be eliminated from public places, Bibles thrown out of public school libraries, commencement exercises conducted without a prayer, and that kids must refrain from saying "Merry Christmas" at school.
I wonder if the author believes that the Constitution should apply to the prisoners at Gitmo then or not.Say what? "… whether our Constitution"? "… how it fits"? What happened to the Constitution being the "supreme law of the land"?
So, the author's mythology is the only correct one. LOLWhoa, talk about a fiery faith! With shepherds like this, no wonder the 1960s flock was scattered and befuddled. No wonder Eastern and cultic religious movements, from Transcendental Meditation to Hare Krishna, flourished and proliferated. And no wonder government, especially the judiciary, became intoxicated with the idea that it could create a more perfect world by enlarging its scope and power.
Sure they have. Someone hasn't taken a biblical studies course ever apparently to justify that lie. The Bible has been translated, re-translated, had meanings change, inserted, and altered over its history.The Bible and the 10 Commandments haven't changed
Yeah, like mythology. Or "activist judge". :roll:Say it enough times, and people come to believe it.
He mentioned amendments, then promptly forgot about 'em.The "living" quality of any contract, including the Constitution, is its integrity – its unchanging nature.
Yeah, good old Andrew Jackson and all the deaths he caused to the Cherokees. That's a swell example.And did you know presidents aren't compelled to obey unlawful Supreme Court decisions? Some presidents, including Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln, have actually defied Supreme Court orders
Assuming to believe that good and evil can only be defined in the realms of mythological text is amusing.Similarly, in making any reference to God or biblical principles off-limits for those we've entrusted with running this nation's government and charting its future course, do you realize what we're doing?
We're deluding ourselves into believing there is some neutral ground between good and evil, and that this is where the government is supposed to be. But such a "neutral ground," if such can even be said to exist, is in itself evil. In fact, it's only people who don't truly believe in God that can even believe it's possible to be neutral.
Hyperbole much?What we're witnessing before our very eyes, in our own lifetime, is the official, ever-so-gradual "squeezing out" of everything that's really precious to America.