O'Donnell questions separation of church, state

[bodecea]

Amazing that a room full of liberal legal students AND the democrat candidate can't figure out that 'separation of church and state' is not in the constitution.

What a sad state the education system has become.

And for all of those arguing Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Dansbury Church, this was the closing.

"I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessings of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem." -Thomas Jefferson

Wow! What happened to that wall TJ?

And...he was saying that as a private citizen which he had the total right to do....you aren't one of those people who can't tell the difference between private and public, are you?

 

[Intense]

You all forget the part about Congress prohibiting the free exercise of religion. No matter what one does for a living, on or off the clock. Get it????? Matters of Conscience do not punch in an out on a time clock. Get that part????? Separation of Church and State was coined by John Locke, A Christian, therefore a Christian Concept. Public School Education sucks where American History and Government is concerned. This has to be by intent, it is too screwed up to be by accident.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[Vanbasten]

And...he was saying that as a private citizen which he had the total right to do....you aren't one of those people who can't tell the difference between private and public, are you?

He was a private citizen in 1802? Wasn't he president?

Boy! That was one hell of a wall he constructed, eh?

 

[bodecea]

And...he was saying that as a private citizen which he had the total right to do....you aren't one of those people who can't tell the difference between private and public, are you?

He was a private citizen in 1802? Wasn't he president?

Boy! That was one hell of a wall he constructed, eh?

So, presidents can't write letters as private citizens? Who knew? My goodness, let's get out those magnifying glasses and break out all those presidential letters, folks. We've got our work cut out for us!

 

[Vanbasten]

So, presidents can't write letters as private citizens? Who knew? My goodness, let's get out those magnifying glasses and break out all those presidential letters, folks. We've got our work cut out for us!

Keep posting. This just gets better and better.

The POTUS writes a letter to a church assuring them that their freedoms will not be infringed upon BY GOVERNMENT, and you think this is a private letter?

Maybe you need to just go read the letter. Here.

WallBuilders - Historical Writings - Letters Between the Danbury Baptists and Thomas Jefferson

 

[pinqy]

Wrong. But they can along with the Courts and ACLU tell the rest of us we cannot hold such exercises in Schools...

The courts have long upheld that students can have religious exercises in schools, and the ACLU has also supported that. But the school can't tell children that they should pray or lead them in prayers. Children are not adults and feel much more pressure to conform from authority figures and from other children, so the rules are a bit different for children. Let's look at Engel v Vitale (1962) which ruled against school prayer. The state of New York wrote a prayer that teachers were required to recite every day at a certain time. I'm not sure how anyone can consider that "free exercise of religion." The court ruled that it was a clear violation of the Establishment clause even though students could opt out:

The Establishment Clause, unlike the Free Exercise Clause, does not depend upon any showing of direct governmental compulsion and is violated by the enactment of laws which establish an official religion whether those laws operate directly to coerce nonobserving individuals or not. This is not to say, of course, that laws officially prescribing a particular form of religious worship do not involve coercion of such individuals. When the power, prestige and financial support of government is placed behind a particular religious belief, the indirect coercive pressure upon religious minorities to conform to the prevailing officially approved religion is plain.

Oh, and note that the lawsuit was brought by multiple parents, not all atheists.

Chaplains in the legislature are not establishing a religion in the same way as a state written and required prayer is.

 

[Intense]

They translate separation of Church and State into being free to pray in your closet, like we are supposed to run and hide or roll over anytime someone says Boo! That is not a correct interpretation. Personally I think that Government's growing conceit and arbitrary misapplication of It's charge, has created It's own Dogma, that rivals that of the Churches, and should be stripped of Government, for the sake of us all.

 

[GHook93]

I do have to say while I support the Tea Parties message, they are tossing up some real bad apples: Angle, O'Donnell and Paul! Paul might lose in a very Red state. O'Donnell is getting killed and making every bad move in the book. Angle is actually bringing live to Reid's campaign and don't ask her to distinguish between Chinese and Japanese, because she can't even distinguish between Latino and Asian. Brilliant comment dumb ass!

However, if you look at her response, she had no idea whether it was true or not that is why she shut the fuck up quick! She had no idea what is in the first amendment, so she was quiet.

Worse yet was she had absolutely no idea what was inside the 14th amendment, the MOST utilitized amendment outside the 1st amendment! Also troubling is she didn't know the 16th amendment! Come on, if your a conservative and you don't know the only amendment addressing taxes then you have issue. ConLaw 101 to everyone, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendment all have do with Civil Rights!!!

The real story here is the liberal arrogance.

It does not say separation of church and state anywhere in the constitution. God is all throughout out government. They prayer before each congressional session, in god we trust, endowed by our creator, all references to God.

A state can not proclaim itself an Islam state or a Jewish state or a Christian state. That's what is meant by The First Amendment : "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

nowhere does the quote separation of church and state appear. This is the brainwashing of political rhetoric.

Yeah. She wasn't making an esoteric argument here.

She's as ignorant of the Constitution as she is of evolution.

 

[Liberty]

it's a valid question imo, where in the constitution does it say that?

 

[GHook93]

What I missed was this debate was at a FUCKING law school! O'Donnell are you seriously not going to have cheat sheet of the constitution with you. Hell you can get it all on page with great notes!!!

Then after fucking up the question about with recent supreme court case she is against, she doesn't even bring a cheat sheet of important case with their black letter laws. All this women probably knows is Roe v. Wade made abortion legal! Glad she wasn't asked about the grand-daddy of all supreme court rulings Marbury v. Madison!

 

[Intense]

it's a valid question imo, where in the constitution does it say that?

It doesn't. Still, it was a part of Lock's philosophy, which Jefferson and Madison were elbow deep in, as were Thoreau, King, and Gandhi.

 

[Flopper]

The real story here is the liberal arrogance.

It does not say separation of church and state anywhere in the constitution. God is all throughout out government. They prayer before each congressional session, in god we trust, endowed by our creator, all references to God.

A state can not proclaim itself an Islam state or a Jewish state or a Christian state. That's what is meant by The First Amendment : "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

nowhere does the quote separation of church and state appear. This is the brainwashing of political rhetoric.

The seperation of church and state is not in the constitution but is derived from the first amendment and the writtings of the founders. The U.S. Supreme Court has currently interpreted it since 1947, to mean that religion and government must stay separate for the benefit of both, including the idea that the government must not impose religion on Americans nor create any law requiring it.

If the state becomes involved in religious matters, Religious freedom would be compromised just as it is many Muslim countries.

 

[Liability]

Wrong. But they can along with the Courts and ACLU tell the rest of us we cannot hold such exercises in Schools...

Fail? Sure. It is YOU that fail bub. This is a two-way street.

The Courts = The law.

You can throw a temper tantrum all you want, but you don't get to make your own laws and are bound by judicial review/interpretation of the Constitution.

The courts absolutely do NOT = the law.

Courts can decide erroneously, just as Congress can legislate unconstitutionally.

To a very real extent, nonetheless, yes we are bound by a court's "interpretation" of the Constitution. But when the Court's engage in "interpretation" that does obvious violence to the actual meaning of the Constitution, what your ilk so frequently forgets is that there are all manners of checks and balances.

Or do you believe that checks and balances end at the portals of the Supreme Court?

 

[bodecea]

They translate separation of Church and State into being free to pray in your closet, like we are supposed to run and hide or roll over anytime someone says Boo! That is not a correct interpretation. Personally I think that Government's growing conceit and arbitrary misapplication of It's charge, has created It's own Dogma, that rivals that of the Churches, and should be stripped of Government, for the sake of us all.

It most certainly illegal to pray in public...and all crosses on private property are ordered to be taken down by law.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?

Where does it say you have the right to own a gun? I keep hearing about 'gun rights' but I can't find that word 'gun' anywhere in the Constitution.

I guess we've been duped by all those 'gun rights' people, claiming a constitutional right to own a gun.

 

[bodecea]

Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?

Where does it say you have the right to own a gun? I keep hearing about 'gun rights' but I can't find that word 'gun' anywhere in the Constitution.

I guess we've been duped by all those 'gun rights' people, claiming a constitutional right to own a gun.

I know, right? It has to be word for word for some people....I guess.

 

[mal]

O'Donnell questions separation of church, state - Politics - Decision 2010 - msnbc.com

"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him.

When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"

Her comments, in a debate aired on radio station WDEL, generated a buzz in the audience.

I thought these Tea Party candidates were all about Constitutionalism? WTF???

I Wrote this almost a Decade ago:

the latest from associalisticpress.com© Separation of Church and State is a Lie

"Separation of Church and State" is NOT in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights... Christine was Correct and everyone in that Law School Audience that Laughed at her or Doubted it is Ignorant of Fact.

The Context you Need to get Familiar with is in that Link and it Includes not only the Jefferson letter, but the letter sent to him from the Danbury Baptists...

It also Includes some other Facts you might want to Familiarize yourself with.

Carry on.



peace...

*ahem*



peace...

 

[Kat]

The real story here is the liberal arrogance.

It does not say separation of church and state anywhere in the constitution. God is all throughout out government. They prayer before each congressional session, in god we trust, endowed by our creator, all references to God.

A state can not proclaim itself an Islam state or a Jewish state or a Christian state. That's what is meant by The First Amendment : "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

nowhere does the quote separation of church and state appear. This is the brainwashing of political rhetoric.

And you've never heard of Thomas Jefferson, right?

What a bunch of idiots you christian right wingers are.

Curious. What about Christian left wingers. Are they idiots too?

 

[pinqy]

I Wrote this almost a Decade ago:

the latest from associalisticpress.com© Separation of Church and State is a Lie

"Separation of Church and State" is NOT in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights... Christine was Correct and everyone in that Law School Audience that Laughed at her or Doubted it is Ignorant of Fact.

The Context you Need to get Familiar with is in that Link and it Includes not only the Jefferson letter, but the letter sent to him from the Danbury Baptists...

It also Includes some other Facts you might want to Familiarize yourself with.

That is a very misleading article in that their facts are not factual.

A display of Moses the Lawgiver holding the Ten Commandments is located directly above the Justices' bench in the Chamber of the United States Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.

This is untrue. According to The Supreme Court

The East Wall Frieze (above) is located directly above the Bench. At the center are two male figures: on the left is the Majesty of Law with a book of law at his side; to the right is the Power of Government who holds the fasces, an ancient Roman symbol of authority. According to a letter from Weinman to Gilbert describing the design for this frieze, the pylon carved with the Roman numerals I to X between the two central figures symbolizes the first ten amendments to the Constitution, also known as the Bill of Rights. Behind the central group, an American eagle spreads its wings.

Now, looking at the Supreme Court description of the South and North Walls we learn that on the South wall are the allegorical figures of Fame, Authority, Light of Wisdom, and History alongside the real figures of Menes, Hammurabi, Moses, Solomon, Lycurgus, Solon, Draco, Confucius, and Octavian. Note from the picture in the link that Moses has no special place. On the North wall are the allegories Liberty and Peace, Right of Man, Equity, and Philosophy with the real figures of Justinian, Muhammed, Charlemagne, King John, Louis IX, Hugo Grotius, Sir William Blackstone, John Marshall, and Napoleon.

Outside, on the Eastern Pediment, Moses is central, but flanked by Confucious and Solon "representing three great civilizations."


What's interesting is that on the Bronze Doors to the Supreme Court are reliefs showing "significant events in the evolution of justice in the Western tradition." The events are:

1. SHIELD OF ACHILLES
2. PRAETOR’S EDICT
3. JULIAN AND SCHOLAR
4. JUSTINIAN CODE
5. MAGNA CARTA
6. WESTMINSTER STATUTE
7. COKE AND JAMES I
8. MARSHALL AND STORY

Note the lack of the Mosaic code or the Ten Commandments as significant events.

For the Danbury Baptists, note their central fear: "that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation;" or, in other words, religion as part of the government and the government supporting religion. They were afraid, that as a minority religion, the majority religion, controlling the government, would use government power to enforce the majority religious beliefs over the minority. Which is exactly what we see happening with efforts to promote mandatory school prayer and teaching of particular religious doctrines (Creationism/intelligent design).

 

[Seawytch]

O'Donnell gets WAY too much press for someone who is going to lose by a HUGE margin...

The only place we should be hearing about this moronic woman is in SNL skits.

Of course, after the drubbing, she'll just become a Fox pundit like the original moron she is a dumber, but nicer, copy of.