We are not talking about the First Amendment in it's entirety, I at least, am talking about the "establishemnt and free exercise" clause of the First Amendment.
I think it is eminently debatable but you're one of the good guys and I don't want to make you an enemy.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
With Lugsoul, on the other hand, I have no problem in wrestling in the mud.
Lug, did you read post #582? :-}
And I'm leaving this forum for tonight after this post, but I'm willing to debate whether or not the First Amendment in its entirety has been applied to the states. I am positive that it has.
What gets me into trouble with many people here is that I will argue what the law is, and even defend it, from my legal background. It has nothing to do with my political, religous, social, or whatever views on the subject. I want to explain what the law is, and why it is.
When I do so, I'm seen on the opposite side philosophically, which may be true or not, depending on the issue.
But my true loyalty is to the Rule of Law and the Constitution. 95% of the time, I think that puts me on the side of Christians, Republicans, conservatives, and all my friends. 5% of the time, I'm making enemies by taking a position.
I'd like to reduce that 5%.
Dean John Jeffries - University of Virginia Law School
Blaine was not the author of the 14th Amendment