Ditto Rushbo. On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Platt Holden <[email protected]> wrote:
> Here is the text of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution > > "Congress shall make no law respecting and establishment of religion, or > prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, > or of the press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to > petition the Government for redress of grievances." > > Note that "separation of church and state" is not in the First Amendment. > O'Donnell was correct. Further, when she asked her opponent for the senate > to name the other rights listed in the First Amendment, he could not. By > DMB's criterion, that should disqualify him as a senator. > > The fact that O'Donnell's correct statement elicited mocking laughter from > the audience of law students illustrates their group ignorance. Not > surprising since the academy these days is under the direction of the > political left whose bigoted views of religion are amply revealed in DMB's > post. > > Platt . > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "david buchanan" < > [email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:26 PM > Subject: Re: [MD] Tea Bagging > > > >> >> Mark said to dmb: >> ... From my following of recent talking heads, there is nothing in the >> constitution which demands the separation of church and state (in fact the >> houses start each day with a prayer). >> >> >> dmb says: >> >> Yea, that's what Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell said on TV recently. >> As Steve pointed out, O'Donnell revealed "her fundamental misunderstanding >> of what our Constitution is" when she said that. "That's in the First >> Amendment?" O'Donnell asked again, eliciting further laughter from the room. >> Any Senate candidate who doesn't understand that certainly deserves to be >> laughed at. As Obama said in a speech recently, this is the essence of who >> we are as a nation. If O'Donnell wins she'll be taking an oath to preserve, >> protect and defend a constitution that she does not understand. In that same >> debate, in fact, she staked out positions that violate that particular >> constitutional principle - the teaching of creationism in public schools. >> >> I can't imagine that any talking head would deny the separation clause of >> the first amendment, except on FOX. The idea is well established in law and >> history and the law school audience that laughed at O'Donnell knows that all >> too well. And every American really should understand that. The first >> amendment is arguably the central pillar of our democracy. It's central in >> the list of principles that Pirsig uses to describe intellectual values, the >> values that should be used to guide society and to protect the process of >> intellectual evolution from social level interference. >> >> I've noticed that religious people sometimes have trouble grasping this >> concept. That's not just a co-incidence, I suppose. There's plain old >> ignorance of course but there are ideological static filters at work too. >> They correlate so strongly that it ALMOST seems like religiosity itself >> CAUSES confusion about the First Amendment. Almost. It almost seems like >> one's understanding and appreciation of the separation principle is in >> direct REVERSE proportion to one's wish for the establishment of religion. >> In other words, it is misread to the extent that it undermines one's wishes. >> Psychologically speaking, this is a fascinating phenomenon. >> >> Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas interprets the first amendment is >> the weakest possible way. He thinks it only prohibits the establishment of a >> federal church by the national Congress and that the 50 State legislatures >> should each be allowed to impose a State religion on its citizens. Does that >> sound like freedom of religion to you? Not me. I think that's morally >> outrageous and wildly unAmerican. >> >> >> >> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org/md/archives.html >> > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
