And the local favorite feels like throwing up when he thinks about the seperation of church and state. I keep reading the constitution and I don't see seperation of church and state in there, only one rule that applies to congress alone about them even recognizing the establishment of religion at all. From what I read, congress cannot even recognize that any religion even exists...otherwise they would be respecting the establishment of a religion, it does not say anything about who would establish such a group, them or otherwise, just that they cannot recognize that it exists.
This has been quite contorted to be sep. of church and state, though that sounds like a good rule and perhaps we should make it law.
[T]he phrase "separation of church and state" in this context is generally traced to a January 1, 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams—who had written in 1644 of "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world"— Jefferson wrote, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."[1]
Jefferson's metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Reynolds v. United States (1879) the Court wrote that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment." In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."[2]
However, the Court has not always interpreted the constitutional principle as absolute, and the proper extent of separation between government and religion in the U.S. remains an ongoing subject of impassioned debate.
I hear ya, LJ, I did know that stuff, and it kinda makes my point. It is not settled and would it not be easier to settle it so that wahoos like Santorum can't try and debate it anymore.
Another one that would be cool to make a law out of, cause it most certainly is not a law, is no taxation without representation. It was a battle cry and elementary kids hear about it, but it is not law in most places. I will give CO credit for allowing non resident land owners to vote on property tax issues, so for once, colorado rised to the top. I have owned much property where I did not have a say on my taxes just because I did not sleep there.
This would be a tough one though, imagine not having to pay sales taxes anywhere you did not vote (because that would be taxation without representation)....but then again, sales taxes, esp in CO, are used as a way to get non locals to carry a larger burden of local expenses. Like taxes on rental cars to pay for the local sports stadium.
Did you guys hear that Santorum is asking for Secret Service protection? I wonder if they will send him a bill like that local cheif for security? Should he have to pay for his own security in his bid to make this a Christian nation, or should that be a public expense?
Did you guys hear that Santorum is asking for Secret Service protection? I wonder if they will send him a bill like that local cheif for security? Should he have to pay for his own security in his bid to make this a Christian nation, or should that be a public expense?
Answer me this. When was the last time a president issued a executive order or a congress voted in a bill or law that installed a theocratic principal into our body of law?
A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States.
photo-fish wrote: A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States.
Sorry that's all I got.
Where is the theocratic law there? Did that bill include any sections that required the citizens of the United Stated to declare that statement as true and law? Did that bill require a loyalty clause that required fealty to that statement? Did that bill contain any punitive measures if a citizen refused to agree with the statement? No in all of those cases. Of course not. Weak sauce. That's not theocratic law. And that motto was first placed on our currency during the civil war. That was over 140 years ago. Where is the theocracy?
Typical stupid politicizing comment. The terms Liberal and Conservative mean less to me every day. You can use them all you want, they do not define who I am and what I believe or think. It just shows your ignorance.
photo-fish wrote: Typical stupid politicizing comment. The terms Liberal and Conservative mean less to me every day. You can use them all you want, they do not define who I am and what I believe or think. It just shows your ignorance.
Then I'll try again in hopes that I get a real answer and not some nonsense.
popcorn eater wrote:
[snip]
Did you guys hear that Santorum is asking for Secret Service protection? I wonder if they will send him a bill like that local cheif for security? Should he have to pay for his own security in his bid to make this a Christian nation, or should that be a public expense?
Answer me this. When was the last time a president issued a executive order or a congress voted in a bill or law that installed a theocratic principal into our body of law?
