Marxist Pelosi Fixing Law to Eliminate God from Oath in House. Vote!

[bodecea]

And i see you've no idea our founding fathers escaped a theocracy they did not wish to recreate here Bueat.....~S~

what they wanted to escape was monarchy and mandatory religion, much like the muslim nations of today.

What the Framers wanted was to safeguard citizens from the sort of ignorance, fear, bigotry, and hate exhibited in your post.

no bigotry or hate in my post, just facts. Sorry if facts offend you. It is a fact that in muslim countries today the head of the religion is also the head of state and the Koran is the body of law that all must live under in that country. No bigotry or hate. I have lived and worked in muslim countries, I speak from experience. while you speak from partisan bigotry and ignorance.

And we certainly don't want that happening here. We learned from the disaster that was the puritans.

 

[beautress]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Yes, and those of us who know they were patterned so that Christian evangelists had the freedom to tell others the good news without the crown swooping down on them, we thank the good Lord for our religious forebears who brought about this insistence on freedom to follow the religion one chose and the right to tell others about the Lord without interference from national leaders.

Thank God!

 

[bodecea]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

It amazes me that anyone thinks in the 21st century that a government should FORCE a person to swear an oath by their idea of a deity...if they don't want to.

 

[beautress]

And i see you've no idea our founding fathers escaped a theocracy they did not wish to recreate here Bueat.....~S~

what they wanted to escape was monarchy and mandatory religion, much like the muslim nations of today.

What the Framers wanted was to safeguard citizens from the sort of ignorance, fear, bigotry, and hate exhibited in your post.

no bigotry or hate in my post, just facts. Sorry if facts offend you. It is a fact that in muslim countries today the head of the religion is also the head of state and the Koran is the body of law that all must live under in that country. No bigotry or hate. I have lived and worked in muslim countries, I speak from experience. while you speak from partisan bigotry and ignorance.

And we certainly don't want that happening here. We learned from the disaster that was the puritans.

Disaster?

O beautiful, for Pilgrims' feet
Whose stern, impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America, America God shed his grace on Thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining Sea!
Katherine Lee Bates, 1893
Surprising Facts About the Author of America the Beautiful​

 

[bodecea]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Yes, and those of us who know they were patterned so that Christian evangelists had the freedom to tell others the good news without the crown swooping down on them, we thank the good Lord for our religious forebears who brought about this insistence on freedom to follow the religion one chose and the right to tell others about the Lord without interference from national leaders.

Thank God!

So...you approve of what the puritans did?.....killing or banishing people who didn't conform to their idea of religion? Forcing people to attend their church for hours upon hours? Banning holidays like christmas? Because that's the ones who came over to get away from the Crown telling them that they couldn't tell everyone to follow THEIR so-called religion.

 

[bodecea]

And i see you've no idea our founding fathers escaped a theocracy they did not wish to recreate here Bueat.....~S~

what they wanted to escape was monarchy and mandatory religion, much like the muslim nations of today.

What the Framers wanted was to safeguard citizens from the sort of ignorance, fear, bigotry, and hate exhibited in your post.

no bigotry or hate in my post, just facts. Sorry if facts offend you. It is a fact that in muslim countries today the head of the religion is also the head of state and the Koran is the body of law that all must live under in that country. No bigotry or hate. I have lived and worked in muslim countries, I speak from experience. while you speak from partisan bigotry and ignorance.

And we certainly don't want that happening here. We learned from the disaster that was the puritans.

Disaster?

O beautiful, for Pilgrims' feet
Whose stern, impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America, America God shed his grace on Thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining Sea!
Katherine Lee Bates, 1893
Surprising Facts About the Author of America the Beautiful​

Yes. Disaster. I didn't stutter. Are you unfamiliar with what the Puritans were all about?

 

[Crixus]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Yes, and those of us who know they were patterned so that Christian evangelists had the freedom to tell others the good news without the crown swooping down on them, we thank the good Lord for our religious forebears who brought about this insistence on freedom to follow the religion one chose and the right to tell others about the Lord without interference from national leaders.

Thank God!

So...you approve of what the puritans did?.....killing or banishing people who didn't conform to their idea of religion? Forcing people to attend their church for hours upon hours? Banning holidays like christmas? Because that's the ones who came over to get away from the Crown telling them that they couldn't tell everyone to follow THEIR so-called religion.

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Yes, and those of us who know they were patterned so that Christian evangelists had the freedom to tell others the good news without the crown swooping down on them, we thank the good Lord for our religious forebears who brought about this insistence on freedom to follow the religion one chose and the right to tell others about the Lord without interference from national leaders.

Thank God!

So...you approve of what the puritans did?.....killing or banishing people who didn't conform to their idea of religion? Forcing people to attend their church for hours upon hours? Banning holidays like christmas? Because that's the ones who came over to get away from the Crown telling them that they couldn't tell everyone to follow THEIR so-called religion.

Lol, 1600 and whaaaat?

 

[beautress]

what they wanted to escape was monarchy and mandatory religion, much like the muslim nations of today.

What the Framers wanted was to safeguard citizens from the sort of ignorance, fear, bigotry, and hate exhibited in your post.

no bigotry or hate in my post, just facts. Sorry if facts offend you. It is a fact that in muslim countries today the head of the religion is also the head of state and the Koran is the body of law that all must live under in that country. No bigotry or hate. I have lived and worked in muslim countries, I speak from experience. while you speak from partisan bigotry and ignorance.

And we certainly don't want that happening here. We learned from the disaster that was the puritans.

Disaster?

O beautiful, for Pilgrims' feet
Whose stern, impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America, America God shed his grace on Thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining Sea!
Katherine Lee Bates, 1893
Surprising Facts About the Author of America the Beautiful​

Yes. Disaster. I didn't stutter. Are you unfamiliar with what the Puritans were all about?

Yes, I do know what the Puritans were all about: escaping from a country who ruled with disdain just like yours.

 

[Crixus]

Pelosi to strike "so help me God" from oath taken in front of key House Committee

​

Liz Cheney said that the Democrat Party has become the Party of Karl Marx.

What do you think of this latest assault on American values by Nancy Pelosi?

The next step is throwing Christians to the Lions. Enough!

OK, I'm a radical believer in God. What's your take on this latest assault on tradition.. I mean, ...eh...power play??

Please vote. And keep the lockstep ninnyhammering to a minimum, please.

So? No one believes it when they do it. It’s nust a “thing” they do before they get their seat on the gravy train. They can be sworn in on a copy of the TWD graphic novel for all I care. Not like they are telling the truth anyway. Swearing in is nothing but a meaningless traditon for them.

 

[bodecea]

What the Framers wanted was to safeguard citizens from the sort of ignorance, fear, bigotry, and hate exhibited in your post.

no bigotry or hate in my post, just facts. Sorry if facts offend you. It is a fact that in muslim countries today the head of the religion is also the head of state and the Koran is the body of law that all must live under in that country. No bigotry or hate. I have lived and worked in muslim countries, I speak from experience. while you speak from partisan bigotry and ignorance.

And we certainly don't want that happening here. We learned from the disaster that was the puritans.

Disaster?

O beautiful, for Pilgrims' feet
Whose stern, impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America, America God shed his grace on Thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining Sea!
Katherine Lee Bates, 1893
Surprising Facts About the Author of America the Beautiful​

Yes. Disaster. I didn't stutter. Are you unfamiliar with what the Puritans were all about?

Yes, I do know what the Puritans were all about: escaping from a country who ruled with disdain just like yours.

Actually you don't seem to know about the Puritans at all. They left England because they were no longer in charge (see: Oliver Cromwell)...so they went to Massachusetts, set up their own theocracy...banished or killed people who didn't tow the line, banished holidays, put people in stocks, ran the colony thru their religion, forced people to go to church for hours at a time and hung people as "witches" because some teenage girls got caught trying to have a good time and decided to lie about what they were doing.

 

[Pogo]

Ummm nnnnnnnnnnnnnno, they were founded on the principles of Liberalism.

A national Constitution doesn't delve into "moral standards". That's what religion is for.

"endowed by their creator" "under God" This country, its constitution, and its body of law are all based on judeo/Christian principles of right and wrong.

You can deny that till the cows come home, but you cannot change it.

We are not a theocracy, we are a free democratic republic that provides freedom of religion to all of its citizens. If you want to see what a theocracy looks like visit Saudi Arabia, their government and law is the Koran as interpreted by the family of Saud.

Nonsense.

It has nothing to do with ‘denying’ anything – it has to do with the fact that Judeo/Christian religious dogma falls woefully short concerning what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; indeed, compelling elected officials to acknowledge a deity they know doesn’t exist is clearly wrong.

If you don't believe then the oath means nothing to you and saying it should not offend you.

If you don't believe and you mouth the words anyway, then you're what we call "LYING". Not the ideal way to start your first day at work, is it.

Ummm nnnnnnnnnnnnnno, they were founded on the principles of Liberalism.

A national Constitution doesn't delve into "moral standards". That's what religion is for.

"endowed by their creator" "under God" This country, its constitution, and its body of law are all based on judeo/Christian principles of right and wrong.

You can deny that till the cows come home, but you cannot change it.

We are not a theocracy, we are a free democratic republic that provides freedom of religion to all of its citizens. If you want to see what a theocracy looks like visit Saudi Arabia, their government and law is the Koran as interpreted by the family of Saud.

Nonsense.

It has nothing to do with ‘denying’ anything – it has to do with the fact that Judeo/Christian religious dogma falls woefully short concerning what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; indeed, compelling elected officials to acknowledge a deity they know doesn’t exist is clearly wrong.

If you don't believe then the oath means nothing to you and saying it should not offend you.

If you don't believe and you mouth the words anyway, then you're what we call "LYING". Not the ideal way to start your first day at work, is it.

I disagree, and for the record its unlikely that you and I will ever agree on anything, and that's OK, we have that right in the USA (although the dems are trying to remove it).

And I'll immediately dispense that in one swell foop:

Rump: "We're gonna 'open up' those libel laws and we're gonna sue you [media] like you've never been sued before"

What's interesting about that ^^ ---- there *WAS* (<< "was, past tense) a YouTube video readily available of that statement (also embedded in the link above) of him making this statement that I could, and did, repeatedly, post on these pages so it could be immediately seen. That video is now GONE. Even though it definitely happened. There were other videos showing it as well. Yet now, NOTHING remains on YouTube of that speech snippet. Not the video I had saved in favorites, nor any other.

Why don't you give the class an alternate-facts explanation of why that particular video would be removed. Even though it clearly happened and clearly is a crucial dynamic that has yet to run its course.

If you end the oath with "so help me God" and you don't believe in God then you aren't lying, you are just repeating what you need to say to get the job.

And you'd be lying in doing so, because you just said that an entity you don't believe exists, will help you. That's impossible. Moreover you DON'T need to say any such thing to get the job ---- see "Constitution, United States", Article 6. That's been there the whole time. Just because that no-religious-test clause has literally always been there, doesn't mean it hasn't been violated.

The oath does not say "so help me God because I believe in God" It simply states for believers that they really mean what they just swore to , with the probably of punishment by God if they were lying. For non believers it means absolutely nothing, and I have no issue with your claim that God is a generic word and could mean allah, Vishnu, Buddha, or the rocks in the forest.

It doesn't, and it's not a generic. "Creator" is generic. Allah means Allah specifically, Buddha beans Buddha specifically, Vishnu means Vishnu specifically, Yahweh means Yahweh etc. And "God" is their Christianist rival. Each has their own characteristics. If they were all the same entity they would not need different names.

If you proclaim "so help me (entity that you believe in but I don't)" you've not only made no statement (so why do it?) but you've also denied your own personal belief. A Muslim has the standing to add an "Insh'Allah". You and I, do not. If you invoke Allah when you do not believe in Allah, or God when you do not believe in God, you're purporting to be a part of something you're not, and that makes you (the generic 'you') a liar.

 

[Pogo]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Not to mention Article VI, to wit:

>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<
.
Doesn't get much more definitive than that. Pretty sure "ever" means "ever" and "any" means "any".
Also pretty sure "no" means "NO".

 

[Faun]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Not to mention Article VI, to wit:

>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<
.
Doesn't get much more definitive than that. Pretty sure "ever" means "ever" and "any" means "any".
Also pretty sure "no" means "NO".

That’s the definitive answer right there ^^^

 

[rightwinger]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Yes, and those of us who know they were patterned so that Christian evangelists had the freedom to tell others the good news without the crown swooping down on them, we thank the good Lord for our religious forebears who brought about this insistence on freedom to follow the religion one chose and the right to tell others about the Lord without interference from national leaders.

Thank God!

Congress shall pass no laws relating to the establishment of religion

 

[Pogo]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Not to mention Article VI, to wit:

>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<
.
Doesn't get much more definitive than that. Pretty sure "ever" means "ever" and "any" means "any".
Also pretty sure "no" means "NO".

That’s the definitive answer right there ^^^

Which, to return to the thread title, means that Nancy Pelosi is literally standing up for the Constitution, and those in opposition are standing against it. Which we kinda knew, but there it is, innit.

 

[bodecea]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Not to mention Article VI, to wit:

>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<
.
Doesn't get much more definitive than that. Pretty sure "ever" means "ever" and "any" means "any".
Also pretty sure "no" means "NO".

That’s the definitive answer right there ^^^

Which, to return to the thread title, means that Nancy Pelosi is literally standing up for the Constitution, and those in opposition are standing against it. Which we kinda knew, but there it is, innit.

Conservative republican christian sharia supporters.

 

[Seawytch]

"endowed by their creator" "under God" This country, its constitution, and its body of law are all based on judeo/Christian principles of right and wrong.

You can deny that till the cows come home, but you cannot change it.

We are not a theocracy, we are a free democratic republic that provides freedom of religion to all of its citizens. If you want to see what a theocracy looks like visit Saudi Arabia, their government and law is the Koran as interpreted by the family of Saud.

Nonsense.

It has nothing to do with ‘denying’ anything – it has to do with the fact that Judeo/Christian religious dogma falls woefully short concerning what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; indeed, compelling elected officials to acknowledge a deity they know doesn’t exist is clearly wrong.

If you don't believe then the oath means nothing to you and saying it should not offend you. But that's not it, is it? You want to prevent the majority from practicing their beliefs. You want a Godless state, you want the third reich in the USA.

Why make it required in an oath for Congress when it is not written in for the oath of office for the presidency? The only possible explanation is that you like the idea of an authoritarian theocracy.

Nonsense.

It has nothing to do with ‘denying’ anything – it has to do with the fact that Judeo/Christian religious dogma falls woefully short concerning what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; indeed, compelling elected officials to acknowledge a deity they know doesn’t exist is clearly wrong.

If you don't believe then the oath means nothing to you and saying it should not offend you. But that's not it, is it? You want to prevent the majority from practicing their beliefs. You want a Godless state, you want the third reich in the USA.

Why make it required in an oath for Congress when it is not written in for the oath of office for the presidency? The only possible explanation is that you like the idea of an authoritarian theocracy.

It's always been required. The first Amendment guarantees freedom OF religion. It does not guarantee freedom FROM religion. Stop the pretense created by your misunderstanding of the First Amendment.

Link to where it has "always been required". I guarantee you that the founding fathers would not have wanted an oath required to be sworn to a god in order to take public office. Remember the no religious test part? You still have not answered the question; Why would you require of a congress person that which is not required of the President? You know the oath for President is in the Constitution, right? Clause 8

Before he enters the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
​

Notice how THEY didn't write "so help me god" in there? Why? I doubt it's because Jesus himself is opposed to oath swearing. Could it be because they didn't want a theocracy like you do?

"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Although that was a quotation from a Psalm, those who heard Christ say it knew what it meant. Remind me not to ask you for what stuff in the bible refers to attempt to challenge people to be confounded by and not blessed by the scriptures, which are to me, a blessing. And you know, hearing sermons each week by some of the best biblical scholars anywhere and hearing them for a lifetime gives you a reasonably good understanding of time, place, circumstance, and specificity of any given scripture taken out of context to "prove" something that could be quite irrelevant to what someone thinks who hasn't had Aramaic, Greek, or Latin linguistics or even King James' English examined for the veracity of Christ's words. But please, don't stop learning the Word. Truth is infectious. Even so, diachronic linguistics and philology well-studied could change your mind. Other than loving the Lord, and considering my politics and your negativism toward it, you'd have a hard time agreeing with me about anything, much less about the matters of the Lord. There likely is nothing under the sun that the Lord wouldn't forgive to the truly contrite heart who walks humbly with his God.

Nowhere in that wall of gibberish was there a coherent response to my post.

 

[sparky]

no bigotry or hate in my post, just facts. Sorry if facts offend you. It is a fact that in muslim countries today the head of the religion is also the head of state and the Koran is the body of law that all must live under in that country. No bigotry or hate. I have lived and worked in muslim countries, I speak from experience. while you speak from partisan bigotry and ignorance.

And we certainly don't want that happening here. We learned from the disaster that was the puritans.

Disaster?

O beautiful, for Pilgrims' feet
Whose stern, impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America, America God shed his grace on Thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining Sea!
Katherine Lee Bates, 1893
Surprising Facts About the Author of America the Beautiful​

Yes. Disaster. I didn't stutter. Are you unfamiliar with what the Puritans were all about?

Yes, I do know what the Puritans were all about: escaping from a country who ruled with disdain just like yours.

Actually you don't seem to know about the Puritans at all. They left England because they were no longer in charge (see: Oliver Cromwell)...so they went to Massachusetts, set up their own theocracy...banished or killed people who didn't tow the line, banished holidays, put people in stocks, ran the colony thru their religion, forced people to go to church for hours at a time and hung people as "witches" because some teenage girls got caught trying to have a good time and decided to lie about what they were doing.

and the only thing that's changed in 400 years might be the hairstyles.....~S~

 

[Redfish]

"endowed by their creator" "under God" This country, its constitution, and its body of law are all based on judeo/Christian principles of right and wrong.

You can deny that till the cows come home, but you cannot change it.

We are not a theocracy, we are a free democratic republic that provides freedom of religion to all of its citizens. If you want to see what a theocracy looks like visit Saudi Arabia, their government and law is the Koran as interpreted by the family of Saud.

Nonsense.

It has nothing to do with ‘denying’ anything – it has to do with the fact that Judeo/Christian religious dogma falls woefully short concerning what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; indeed, compelling elected officials to acknowledge a deity they know doesn’t exist is clearly wrong.

If you don't believe then the oath means nothing to you and saying it should not offend you.

If you don't believe and you mouth the words anyway, then you're what we call "LYING". Not the ideal way to start your first day at work, is it.

"endowed by their creator" "under God" This country, its constitution, and its body of law are all based on judeo/Christian principles of right and wrong.

You can deny that till the cows come home, but you cannot change it.

We are not a theocracy, we are a free democratic republic that provides freedom of religion to all of its citizens. If you want to see what a theocracy looks like visit Saudi Arabia, their government and law is the Koran as interpreted by the family of Saud.

Nonsense.

It has nothing to do with ‘denying’ anything – it has to do with the fact that Judeo/Christian religious dogma falls woefully short concerning what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; indeed, compelling elected officials to acknowledge a deity they know doesn’t exist is clearly wrong.

If you don't believe then the oath means nothing to you and saying it should not offend you.

If you don't believe and you mouth the words anyway, then you're what we call "LYING". Not the ideal way to start your first day at work, is it.

I disagree, and for the record its unlikely that you and I will ever agree on anything, and that's OK, we have that right in the USA (although the dems are trying to remove it).

And I'll immediately dispense that in one swell foop:

Rump: "We're gonna 'open up' those libel laws and we're gonna sue you [media] like you've never been sued before"

What's interesting about that ^^ ---- there *WAS* (<< "was, past tense) a YouTube video readily available of that statement (also embedded in the link above) of him making this statement that I could, and did, repeatedly, post on these pages so it could be immediately seen. That video is now GONE. Even though it definitely happened. There were other videos showing it as well. Yet now, NOTHING remains on YouTube of that speech snippet. Not the video I had saved in favorites, nor any other.

Why don't you give the class an alternate-facts explanation of why that particular video would be removed. Even though it clearly happened and clearly is a crucial dynamic that has yet to run its course.

If you end the oath with "so help me God" and you don't believe in God then you aren't lying, you are just repeating what you need to say to get the job.

And you'd be lying in doing so, because you just said that an entity you don't believe exists, will help you. That's impossible. Moreover you DON'T need to say any such thing to get the job ---- see "Constitution, United States", Article 6. That's been there the whole time. Just because that no-religious-test clause has literally always been there, doesn't mean it hasn't been violated.

The oath does not say "so help me God because I believe in God" It simply states for believers that they really mean what they just swore to , with the probably of punishment by God if they were lying. For non believers it means absolutely nothing, and I have no issue with your claim that God is a generic word and could mean allah, Vishnu, Buddha, or the rocks in the forest.

It doesn't, and it's not a generic. "Creator" is generic. Allah means Allah specifically, Buddha beans Buddha specifically, Vishnu means Vishnu specifically, Yahweh means Yahweh etc. And "God" is their Christianist rival. Each has their own characteristics. If they were all the same entity they would not need different names.

If you proclaim "so help me (entity that you believe in but I don't)" you've not only made no statement (so why do it?) but you've also denied your own personal belief. A Muslim has the standing to add an "Insh'Allah". You and I, do not. If you invoke Allah when you do not believe in Allah, or God when you do not believe in God, you're purporting to be a part of something you're not, and that makes you (the generic 'you') a liar.

I have never seen the video you mentioned. but if he said what you claim, so what? why should the media be exempt from libel laws? Why should they be permitted to lie continuously for either side of any issue?

You don't know much about religion if you don't understand that God is generic for the creator or supreme being, the Greeks had "Gods" The muslims call God Allah, its language of religion.

But as I said earlier, you and I are never going to agree on much, and that's just fine. Currently my views are the majority views and yours are the radical left.

 

[Redfish]

Why should anyone have to swear to god to belong to congress?

Hasn’t anyone read the First Amendment?

Not to mention Article VI, to wit:

>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<
.
Doesn't get much more definitive than that. Pretty sure "ever" means "ever" and "any" means "any".
Also pretty sure "no" means "NO".

Would "so help me Hillary" work for you?

This whole thread is ridiculous