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


1 posted on 07/06/2006 10:27:16 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Hildy; doodlelady; SoCalPol; CyberAnt; Tailgunner Joe


PING


2 posted on 07/06/2006 10:29:32 AM PDT by onyx (Deport the trolls --- send them back to DU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tailgunner Joe
The title is misleading. It gives the impression that the SCOTUS has ruled in favor of retaining the cross. The article is a historical recitation, devoid of any information on a ruling in this case.
3 posted on 07/06/2006 10:34:26 AM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tailgunner Joe
When Jefferson wrote to the Baptist Association, he gave assurance that they could worship in their church free from any interference from the national government

That's a complete misinterpretation of the correspondence between Jefferson & the Danbury Baptists.

4 posted on 07/06/2006 10:39:31 AM PDT by gdani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tailgunner Joe

SPOTREP


9 posted on 07/06/2006 11:02:55 AM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tailgunner Joe

IMO if one believes the precedent -that the Constitution is a written instrument .As such it's meaning does not alter.That which it meant when it was adopted it means now."
South Carolina v. the United States,199 U.S.437,448(1905)
or "the values of the Framers of the Constitution must be
applied in any case construeing the Constitution.Inferences from the text and history of the Constitution should be given great weight in determining the intentions of those who ratified the Constitution.The precedental value of
cases and commentators tends to increase, therefore in proportion to thei rproximity to the adoption of the Constitution, the Bill of rights, and any other amendments.
Powell v. McCormack395 Us.486,547 (1969)And if one considers
the Judicairy COmmittee reports of 19,Jan.1853(Mr Badger for the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Establishment Clause and Establisment of Religion) and corresponding report in the US House of Representives on same subject 27 March ,1854 (Mr Meacham for the House report) Both legal
and Congressional utterances agree with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ,Circuit Court Judge Suhrheinrich, Dec.2005 "The repeated reference to the Separation of Church and State ...(by the ACLU) ... has grown tiresome.The
first Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and State." a decisionupheld by the entire Court-shortly thereafter.


11 posted on 07/06/2006 11:10:36 AM PDT by StonyBurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MHGinTN; Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; ...
"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded...by Christians...on the Gospel of Jesus Christ."

--Patrick Henry

Pro-Life...of the Republic PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

14 posted on 07/06/2006 3:18:28 PM PDT by cpforlife.org (It cannot be emphasized too strongly that this great nation was founded...by Christians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tailgunner Joe
Got a call from these guys this evening looking for a donation to help fight the ACLU

http://www.fidelis.org/

20 posted on 07/07/2006 7:56:06 PM PDT by evad
[ 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