Does grammar have a role to
play in the controversy between Marty and Jim? If so, it seems Marty wins.
"Democratic" is, of course, an adjective; "Democrat" is a noun. If not, why
not?
Bobby
Robert Justin
LipkinProfessor of LawWidener University School of
LawDelaware
How about capitalization? How about punctuation?
I will call the Democrat Party the Democrat Party. Truth is, I only
pretend to be saluting McCarthy, whose information turned out to be impeccable
even if his personality and ethic did not. My pretense was offered
because, in pointing out the
I never associated Democrat Party with McCarthy, although I'm not all that
surprised to learn that he originated it. I always associated it with middle
school. It is intended to be somehow insulting without really having any
discernable meaning and without being very clever. It is a middle
So help me God seems to have been used in at least some of
the state constitutional oaths in the late 18th century. Here is an excerpt
from the 1776 South Carolina Constitution (available at http://federalistpatriot.us/histdocs/constitution_of_south_carolina.asp)
XXXIII. That all
In a message dated 7/20/2005 9:15:43 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How about capitalization? How about punctuation?
I will call the Democrat Party the Democrat
Party.
You can, of course,
call the Democratic Party anything you wish. However, the
Title: Message
I
assume this isa typical reaction of the "Christian Right". I'm
delighted you list folk are not stimulated to make such quick comments, but
I'dappreciate anyviews (I confess ignorance about John G.
Roberts).
Dan
-Original Message-From: Christian Response
At least you concede that
you were taunting. And I thought that that was inappropriate comment on this
listserv. It would help if you would respect the norms.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005
10:29 AM
To:
The Founding Father's commanded "no religious test shall ever be required."
The First Amendment commands "religion," shall not be established by law
or Congress. It is way past time for attorneys, judges, and justices to recognize
the words of the Constitution. The words "church and state" are
Read Thomas Pain!
The Founding Father's commanded "no religious test shall ever be required."
The First Amendment commands "religion," shall not be established by law
or Congress. It is way past time for attorneys, judges, and justices to recognize
the words of the Constitution. The words
In a message dated 7/20/2005 11:35:01 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It would help if you would
respect the norms.
Please. An end to this nonsense.
I will call the Democrat Party the Democrat Party. Some of you may
dislike it. You, in turn, will call me juvenile.
If "Establishment of Religion" has a known and definite meaning in the
context of its adoption with the rest of what became the First Amendment, why do
we have to "get real" in a way that inflates new meanings, new limitations, and
new disparagements of religion into that text?
As a strict
Words mean things. The Establishment Clause does have a definite meaning.
"Religion" is not to be established by law or Congress. "Religion" means
religion, not something less.
English 101: the word "thereof" in the Free Exercise Clause gets its entire
meaning from that to which it refers in
Don't confuse the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)
with the ACLJ (American Center for Law and Justice). They may agree on
freedom of religious speech, and on free exercise when there is no
countervailing civil liberty that the ACLU likes better. But on the whole,
I suspect thatboth
I don't understand what all this food-fighting is about. I am a proud member of the Republic Party and I am not offended when others call it the Republic Party!
Cheers and Blessings to Democrat and Republic listmembers alike, Rick Duncan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 7/20/2005
The Becket Fund recently wona
strikinglysimilarcase (sans the shoplifting)thispast
March, inIn re Saeed Salman et al., no. A77-820-450, see http://www.becketfund.org/index.php/case/28.html.
The case concerned a family of Iranians who arrived to the U.S. on a
visitor'svisas in 1999. They
And to the Libertars and Socials as well.
On 7/20/05, Rick Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand what all this food-fighting is about. I am a proud member
of the Republic Party and I am not offended when others call it the Republic
Party!
Cheers and Blessings to Democrat and
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I will call the Democrat Party the Democrat Party. Some of you
may dislike it.
If I had my voter registration card with me here, I could see just what
it says I am. Since I don't, I'll have to go on memory alone. I'm
pretty sure I'm a registered member of the
What about the Pale Mint folk?
Samuel V wrote:
And to the Libertars and Socials as well.
On 7/20/05, Rick Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand what all this food-fighting is about. I am a proud member
of the Republic Party and I am not offended when others call it the
On the other hand, I don't suppose President Zachary Taylor would have
described his party as the Whiggish Party. Thus the name of a party need not
be an adjective.
And note that for Republicans, Socialists, Libertarians, etc. the same word
describes the party and a member of it (e.g., a member
Scarberry, Mark wrote:
Thus the Democratic Party seems to want special
treatment, claiming the right to have its members known as Democrats rather
than Democratics. :-)
That's 'cause we're special*. *Noddle*
Jean
*For an unspecified value of "special"
Thank you, Professor. The slight acronymic distinction between the two organizations
is confusing. Jim Henderson of the ACLJ is a 1984ish flaming liberal revisionist,
not a strict constructionist. The ACLU is an accommodationist organization
which erroneously reads the Free Exercise Clause as
Arthur V. Watkins, a Republican, was an honorable man. Consequently, the censure of Joseph McCarthy was not done in error. Had his information been "impeccable," he would not have been censured.
The Party of Joseph McCarthy may, if it chooses, call the Democratic Party "the Democrat Party" in
At 09:19 AM 7/20/05 -0500, you wrote:
I never associated Democrat Party with McCarthy, although I'm not all that
surprised to learn that he originated it. I always associated it with
middle school. It is intended to be somehow insulting without really
having any discernable meaning and
23 matches
Mail list logo
