Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Offered for comment.
1 posted on 07/11/2005 9:37:18 AM PDT by Warhammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Warhammer
The defining legal issue of our generation is not the right to life or even the definition of the family, but whether the United States of America — through its laws, its charters, its magistrates, and its public institutions — can and will meaningfully acknowledge the God of the Bible.[1] The acknowledgment of God is the first principle of liberty, a fact which was recognized by the Founding Fathers who declared that “we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights.”[2]
The short answer is that leaders may, acting as individuals, freely profess any and all religious beliefs, or none at all. This is protected in Article VI of the Constitution, which states that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Additionally, the First Amendment forbids Establishment of a state religion. Clearly this forbids the government from taking a position on whether or not the Bible was divinely inspired.

Note that despite the Declaration's references to a Creator, the Constitution is silent on the issue. Save the ambiguous matter of the date, there is no reference to the Bible or to any Deity or other divine figure.

-Eric

2 posted on 07/11/2005 9:49:30 AM PDT by E Rocc (Anyone who thinks Bush-bashing is banned on FR has never read a Middle East thread >:))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Warhammer
I'm not sure where to start, so I will keep it short. This clearly shows the dangers of the extreme right to the future of the Republican Party. The author of this piece would most definitely support a theocracy in this Country. He takes us from a recognition of certain rights endowed by our creator in the Declaration of Independence all the way to subjegating the Constitution to the Bible. Along the way, he sets a course for outlawing not only homosexual acts but homosexuality itself in the US. He seems completely unaware of the First Amendment in a number of respects, and would without a doubt establish Christianity (of some sort) as the official religion of the country. He doesn't say what the status of the other faiths or non-faiths would be, but it should not be difficult to guess.

This is not a pretty picture, but many of the far right will support his position, and will be demoralized when they find out the Roy Moore is not on Bush's short list for the USSC.

3 posted on 07/11/2005 10:08:57 AM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Warhammer
As soon as I find a democrat who is more:

Pro-life

Pro-US Sovereignty

Pro-God (walking the walk, not just talking the talk)

Pro-family

than the republican he's running against I'll be happy to vote for him. I haven't seen one so far. I'd even happily pay higher taxes, well maybe not happily, to a democrat who will uphold these values. Sorry to say, the republicans haven't impressed me with their committment to the above values.

4 posted on 07/11/2005 10:16:20 AM PDT by Roos_Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Warhammer
It is important to note, however, that though the constitution indicates that denominational religious tests shall not be required, it does presuppose that office-holders will take oaths to God and enforce a document which acknowledges Him and is based largely on principles derived from His revealed law.

It is important to note that this is complete balderdash. There is only one oath of office spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, and that is the oath of office taken by the President. And guess what? That oath doesn't mention God at all! There are plenty of other examples of bullhooey in this piece, but this one kinda jumped out.
5 posted on 07/11/2005 10:23:23 AM PDT by drjimmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Warhammer
We must be God’s people in this nation, a holy remnant who insist that men and nations must acknowledge Him and no other God.

This is pathetic. Obviously this guy couldn't care less about the Constitution, so why would anyone care about his opinions regarding who should or shouldn't be on the Court? Why did you even post this?

9 posted on 07/11/2005 11:39:31 AM PDT by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Warhammer

Later read/pingout?


16 posted on 07/11/2005 1:37:18 PM PDT by little jeremiah (A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, are incompatible with freedom. P. Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

The [first] test is this: Will the nominee publicly acknowledge and fear the God of Scripture as the lawgiver from whose revelation all valid laws of man are derived?
This is not necessary. The position of Supreme Court justice is of one to interpret the Constitution, not the Bible or Christian theology. There is sufficient documentation from the period that, when coupled with one's intuition, to come to a reasonable approximation of what the Founders had in mind when they drafted and ratified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I think one may recognize the influence of the Bible on the Constitution, but it is not necessary for a justice to be born again to properly interpret the document.
26 posted on 07/11/2005 3:04:03 PM PDT by jayhorn (when i hit the drum, you shake the booty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Warhammer
"Offered for comment."

Frightening!

28 posted on 07/11/2005 4:11:17 PM PDT by wireman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Warhammer

'The United States Supereme(sic)Court's War on the Sovereignty of God'

Prediction: God wins.


29 posted on 07/11/2005 4:19:38 PM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian; CCWoody; Wrigley; Gamecock; Jean Chauvin; jboot; AZhardliner; Alex Murphy; ...
*ping*


53 posted on 07/12/2005 11:36:19 AM PDT by sheltonmac ("Duty is ours; consequences are God's." -Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson