Rights of States Built into the Constitution (The Encroaching Feds And The Case of Judge Moore)

FamilyNews In Focus ^

[gogeo]

You people are really determined to establish that most pharisaic form of Evangelical Christianity as a state religion here. Much as you'd like, it ain't happening...

As much as you've commented on this, you ought to be able to follow the discussion, huh? What's being discussed is judicial construction and activism. Try to curb your anti-Christian bias.

[gogeo]

Why do we need legislation? It's already in the U.S. Constitution: Amendment X

Well, ok...how do we then address it?

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Ah, so expressing disdain for pharisaic versions of Evangelicalism makes me "anti-Christian"? Am I supposing that the loudest "look at me" Christians are the only models of true Christianity in your book?

[jammer]

Agreed. Only one example need suffice--the War on Drugs.

[gogeo]

Ah, so expressing disdain for pharisaic versions of Evangelicalism makes me "anti-Christian"? Am I supposing that the loudest "look at me" Christians are the only models of true Christianity in your book?

Actually, your anti-Christian ranting is what makes you anti-Christian. It's for protection from fools such as yourself that religious freedom became a constitutional right...and why we now struggle against unconstitutional and illegal judges and rulings.

[steve50]

The "state's rights" advocates regarding religious freedom go strangely quiet when asked to address this issue.

[steve50]

Enjoyed your Pharisee and the tax collector post yesterday CP. You get much action on it?

[antisocial]

Well, of course it applies. I believe the 10th amendment
was ment to be exactly what it says.

[mac_truck]

There was a time not long ago when "states' rights" was a code word. 1960s liberals Southern democrats turned it into a code word for the N word, Jim Crow laws, and the KKK. Any attempt to discuss states' rights was immediate diverted to defending yourself against accusations of being a racist.

... and I say ... segregation today ... segregation tomorrow ... segregation forever.

[Lost Highway]

You people are really determined to establish that most pharisaic form of Evangelical Christianity as a state religion here.

If that means not bowing to the all mighty wizards in long black robes no matter how contradictory their "interpretations" of the Constitution are then yes.

[snopercod]

Well, ok...how do we then address it?

1. Educate yourself on the concept of federalism as understood by the founding fathers.

2. Support judges and legislators that adhere to those concepts.

[snopercod]

Here's what I'm talking about:

The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of Amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, delegated to that Government certain definite powers, reserving each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government;

and whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force:

that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party:

that the Government created by this compact, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution the measure of its powers; but that, as to other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.

From The State of Alabama has the Power of Nullification

[LiteKeeper]

Check this out, please

Rehnquist's Dissent in Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)

[Henk]

CP, Let 'em have their cake! It will fun to watch the law of unintended consequences in action when the zealots get their way. You want to mix government and religion, be prepared for

1. Justice Department attention to inequitable collection and distribution of tithes among various churches.
2. Racial quotas in church congregations.
3. Lawsuits from Islamic groups to have verses from the Koran prominently displayed in courtrooms.
4. Mandatory religious training in schools (and, not your religion, but "all religions").
5. Government control over who can be a preacher, what they can say, what is or is not a church.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Some - it was fun to put up.

[gogeo]

Look, maybe you didn't understand the question...what do we do about it???

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Yes, that's my point. You cannot be for the 10th Amendment to the Consitution without being "racist." For four decades liberals from the 1960s until now have screamed "racist, "bigot." No discourse was allowed.

And yes, southern Democrats and others supported coninued segregation. There's more to the 10th Amendment than segregation.

[TheFrog]

Re: "The U.S. Congress is specifically forbidden from making laws regarding the establishment of a religion, but the states are not." So, are saying that a state such as California could lawfully ban a religion such as Christianity.

Alternatively, on a broader scale are you saying that any state could establish a religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof; or abridge the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the remove the right of the people peaceably to assemble, or prevent the petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Is your name Stalin by any chance.

On a lighter note, let us look at this amendment, as it existed in the Virginia Constitution before it included in the United States Constitution.

That religion or the duty which we owe our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other. No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. And the General Assembly shall not prescribe any religious test whatever, or confer any peculiar privileges or advantages on any sect or denomination, or pass any law requiring authorizing any religious society, or the people of any district within this Commonwealth, to levy on themselves or others, any tax for the erection or repair of any house of public worship, or for the support of any church or ministry; but it shall be left free to every person to select his religious instructor, and to make for his support such private contract as he shall please.

[NutCrackerBoy]

Alan Keyes ROCKS!

[E.G.C.]

Here are my thoughts on the subject.

There has been a lot of observations offered on this issue from many people, including Rush Limbaugh and other radio talk hosts. Now, I have a different perspective on this issue as suggested by a participant in an internet chat room session that I witnessed and participated in eariler this week.

The people that filed this lawsuit to have the ten commandments removed did so because they were offended by them. So, the question becomes what if I put a ten commandments monument in front of my house.

The difference there is my house is MY private property that is paid for with my own money, so therefore it is NOT a goverment property like the courthouse in Montgomery where this is going on.

Furtthermore, it is not our obligation as christians to avoid offending the athiests and progressives and what have you with our ideas and since it is WE and not the goverment that owns our property, if we wanted to put a ten commandments monument similar to Judge Moore's on our property, I don't see how this supposed "separation of church and state" would apply to us.

And I can gurantee you that that judge who ruled against Judge Moore would not get any compliance from me if he tried to pull that same stunt(making me remove the momument from my own property) on me.
Regards.