Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do you know the difference between a militant atheist and a Christian who is registered to vote as a Democrat?ding said: Militant atheists are the greatest threat to liberty and freedom. Militant atheists believe in abolishing all religion.
78% of Democrat members of Congress are Christians. What is it? You are in fear of.
That the Bill of Rights - as originally written - only applied to the federal government is not an opinion. It is an established fact that you can easily check for yourself. You don't need for me to convince you of it, you don't need to argue with me about it. You only need to check this for yourself. What part of this don't you understand?opinions vary,, and yours lacks reality,,
Yes, we have a duty to use reasoning, if that means questioning the very existence of God, when we do so that is homage to our creator.. If human reason produces the idea that God does not exist it remains “homage” to God.Jefferson believed that natural rights are granted because we have a duty to the creator.
my question is about today not history,,That the Bill of Rights - as originally written - only applied to the federal government is not an opinion. It is an established fact that you can easily check for yourself. You don't need for me to convince you of it, you don't need to argue with me about it. You only need to check this for yourself. What part of this don't you understand?
my question is about today not history,,
Great. That's not how this started.my question is about today not history,,
its exactly how I started,,Great. That's not how this started.
The Constitution prohibits the hierarchy of Churches/Religions from being involved in State/Federal government. Popes, bishops, priests, ministers are set apart from government. However, this separation does not apply to the laity. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states the vocation of the laity:
898 "By reason of their special vocation it belongs to the laity to seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and directing them according to God's will....
899 The initiative of lay Christians is necessary especially when the matter involves discovering or inventing the means for permeating social, political, and economic realities with the demands of Christian doctrine and life. This initiative is a normal element of the life of the Church….
People/citizens of faith are not only citizens of a nation, but are also citizens of the Kingdom of God. It is not only our right, but our duty to permeate the social, political, and economic realities within our governments.
78% of Democrat in Congress are Christians
Do you know the difference between a militant atheist and a Christian who is registered to vote as a Democrat?
It reads “to the states or to the people” and is in the spirit of that,That the Bill of Rights - as originally written - only applied to the federal government is not an opinion.
I couldn't care less what she or others believe.Jenna Ellis believes all who vote Democrat are Luciferian Communists dedicated to destroying her Biblical Worldview that her America was founded as a Christian Nation.
There are millions of rightwing Christians who like her who fear Democrats are militant atheists who are trying to destroy the ONLY TRUE interpretation of Christianity. Hers.
That's an idiotic way of looking at it.It reads “to the states or to the people” and is in the spirit of that,
States cannot deprive “the people” of a natural right and successively be deprived of any liberty unless that liberty causes harm to other’s life liberty and pursuit of happiness.
Quit the lies You have been steered wrong by Shitty Americans.
When your argument wanders off into bullshit territory you need to care becauseI couldn't care less what she or others believe.
Do you know the difference between a militant atheist and a Christian who is registered to vote as a Democrat?
Just because what other people believe upsets you doesn't mean I have to let what other people believe upset me.When your argument wanders off into bullshit territory you need to care because
you asked me this question.
You see I do you know the difference between a militant atheist and a Christian who is registered to vote as a Democrat?
It’s your Kingdom of God coalition that is the base of the Republican Party still voting for Trump and keeping the Pussy Grabber afloat who collectively make zero distinction between militant atheist and a Christian who is registered to vote as a Democrat?
That's an idiotic way of looking at it.
The Bill of Rights - as originally written and ratified - applied to the Federal government. That's it. It makes no mention of what states could or would do. It left state matters up to the states. That's how the founding fathers intended for it to be.
What is your point? Because if you are arguing the Bill of Rights always applied to the states, then why did SCOTUS need "incorporation?"It mentions powers and limits both to the states and to the people.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Are you saying it was the founder’s intent to protect citizens from Federal Police busting into people’s homes without a warrant, but state police could do it with impunity:The Bill of Rights - as originally written and ratified - applied to the Federal governmen
I'm saying the founders intended for the bill of rights to apply only to the federal government.Are you saying it was the founde’s intent to protect citizens from Federal Police busting into people’s homes without a warrent, but state police could do it with impunity:
