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.
I already posted the Supremacy Clause (a few times)...and highlighted the supremacy statement of it in blue, bold , size 7 print. What more do you want ? A tattoo of it on your chest ?
I already posted the Supremacy Clause (a few times)...and highlighted the supremacy statement of it in blue, bold , size 7 print. What more do you want ? A tattoo of it on your chest ?
Are you saying this is not the actual Article 6, Section 2 (Supremacy Clause) ? What ARE you saying ?
You got it backwards. A religion has nothing to do with the supremacy clause. If a religion (or anything else) is supremacist, then it's in violation of the Supremacy clause, and as such is unconstitutional. Such is the case with Islam. You don't get to rip away the Supremacy Clause under ANY conditions.The supremacy clause has nothing to do with religion. You don't get to rip away a religions status as a religion simply Because you want to violate the constitution
PS - is this what you think Italy and other countries have done ? You think they ripped away Islam's status as a religion, because they wanted to violate something ?
This whole thread has refuted that dumb notion over 100 times already. Go back to sleep.He'll first need to amend the Constitution to repeal the First Amendment.
It's never been refuted, and it never will be. You're living in a self-imposed fake artificial pretend fantasy dream bubble world of Denialism. Like the Birfers and the "Hitler's living in Argentina" people.
Good thing Amendment One is actually written down so the rest of us don't forget, huh?
Compared to the Supremacy Clause, your so cool Amendment One, ain't so cool. Actually, it has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
You just posted one of the most idiotic posts in the history of this forum.
I don't know what you're even talking about. Doesn't make any sense. You think the 1st Amendement stops the Supremacy Clause from outlawing supremacisms ? You think it doesn't do that ? What's the matter ? You don't understand English ? It says > This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND (Not Islam or its Sharia law)By refuting you mean completely ignored, yeah sure you refuted it.
But if you are using the actual definition then nowhere in your insane ramblings have you refuted it. You cannot deny first amendment protection. Period.
LOL. The 1st amendment trumps the Supremacy clause huh. HA HA HA..Now I've heard them all. This is the winner.It's never been refuted, and it never will be. You're living in a self-imposed fake artificial pretend fantasy dream bubble world of Denialism. Like the Birfers and the "Hitler's living in Argentina" people.
Good thing Amendment One is actually written down so the rest of us don't forget, huh?
Compared to the Supremacy Clause, your so cool Amendment One, ain't so cool. Actually, it has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
You just posted one of the most idiotic posts in the history of this forum.
Says the person who doesn't have a clue what the supremacy clause.
You do realize that if your deranged theory was credible that because the First amendment is an amendment to the Constitution that contains the Supremacy clause it would trump the Supremacy clause if there were ever a conflict don't you?
See that's the funny thing about amendments, they supersede what they amend.
But as the Supremacy clause has no conflict with the first amendment it's a moot point. Supremacy Clause just grants Federal law priority over state laws.
He also said he would put Isis terrorists in their graves...one and all. Let's make that the main plan.
In other words, you're saying NOTHING at all.I'm saying there's no such thing as a schnozberry, no matter how desperately you try to dream one up.
Today peopleTrump, playing his Ode to Morons, for his mental children...Not only is it not unconstitutional to close the mosques, it is unconstitutional to allow them to be open, and that has been the case for 226 years. Islam is a supremacism. It is the largest and most clear-cut supremacism in the world. As such, it is 100% ILLEGAL/UNCONSTITUTIONAL, so says US Constitution Article 6, Section 2, the Supremacy Clause >>Unconstitutional.
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."
The Supreme Court has interpreted religion to mean a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to the place held by God in the lives of other persons. The religion or religious concept need not include belief in the existence of God or a supreme being to be within the scope of the First Amendment.
Under SCOTUS definition of a religion Islam would certainly qualify as a religion as well as practically any cult in the country. The court has been extremely tolerant as what constitutes a religion. If Trump issued and executive order to close Mosques, it would be shot down by the courts before the ink dried and Congress would probably draft a bill on impeachment.
Don't you people realize Trump is pulling your chain? He may not be a constitutional scholar but he has at least some vague knowledge of the 1st amendment.
Religion
And that wouldn't happen because of how the Supreme Court defines religion. Any attempt to abridge American's freedom of assembly and worship would be blocked by the courts as a gross violation of the constitution.The only way this could be done within ten miles of the Constitution is to declare that Islam is not a real religion, I reckon. Does anyone see that happening?
That would open up some interesting avenues regarding Scientology™, though...
.
There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.I don't know what you're even talking about. Doesn't make any sense. You think the 1st Amendement stops the Supremacy Clause from outlawing supremacisms ? You think it doesn't do that ? What's the matter ? You don't understand English ? It says > This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND (Not Islam or its Sharia law)By refuting you mean completely ignored, yeah sure you refuted it.
But if you are using the actual definition then nowhere in your insane ramblings have you refuted it. You cannot deny first amendment protection. Period.
I most certainly CAN cannot deny first amendment protection, and most certainly do just that, when the first amendment activity is illegal and unconstitutional. You are trying to push a very weak argument, which I already thoroughly refuted earlier in the thread. You seem to have not read the earlier posts, or you wouldn't be making such foolish statements. As I said before, (since you're too lazy to read the earlier posts >>
The very weak 1st amendment has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
All you're doing here is adding to the stupidity of other posters who also tried to say the same thing you're saying now. You carry no weight here.
I guess that I am a little surprised that Trump has not revealed a plan to make all Muslims wear a yellow badge on their clothes...
There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.I don't know what you're even talking about. Doesn't make any sense. You think the 1st Amendement stops the Supremacy Clause from outlawing supremacisms ? You think it doesn't do that ? What's the matter ? You don't understand English ? It says > This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND (Not Islam or its Sharia law)By refuting you mean completely ignored, yeah sure you refuted it.
But if you are using the actual definition then nowhere in your insane ramblings have you refuted it. You cannot deny first amendment protection. Period.
I most certainly CAN cannot deny first amendment protection, and most certainly do just that, when the first amendment activity is illegal and unconstitutional. You are trying to push a very weak argument, which I already thoroughly refuted earlier in the thread. You seem to have not read the earlier posts, or you wouldn't be making such foolish statements. As I said before, (since you're too lazy to read the earlier posts >>
The very weak 1st amendment has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
All you're doing here is adding to the stupidity of other posters who also tried to say the same thing you're saying now. You carry no weight here.
Consider this: not all Muslims are extremists. Can we agree on this?
No. When "the crap starts" they have to join with the Terrorists. They are only "laying low" until.
There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.I don't know what you're even talking about. Doesn't make any sense. You think the 1st Amendement stops the Supremacy Clause from outlawing supremacisms ? You think it doesn't do that ? What's the matter ? You don't understand English ? It says > This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND (Not Islam or its Sharia law)By refuting you mean completely ignored, yeah sure you refuted it.
But if you are using the actual definition then nowhere in your insane ramblings have you refuted it. You cannot deny first amendment protection. Period.
I most certainly CAN cannot deny first amendment protection, and most certainly do just that, when the first amendment activity is illegal and unconstitutional. You are trying to push a very weak argument, which I already thoroughly refuted earlier in the thread. You seem to have not read the earlier posts, or you wouldn't be making such foolish statements. As I said before, (since you're too lazy to read the earlier posts >>
The very weak 1st amendment has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
All you're doing here is adding to the stupidity of other posters who also tried to say the same thing you're saying now. You carry no weight here.
That's the really cool thing about Executive Orders. They can be implemented immediately while SCOTUS cases can take years to work their way up. It's how Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and FDR interned the Japanese... read some fucking history, ass munch.
The US Supreme can and has issued injunctions to give the court time to hear a case. However, the more likely course would be a federal district court would enter an injunction which only take hours. Then schedule a hearing of the case. After the lower court ruled then it could go to the Supreme Court.There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.I don't know what you're even talking about. Doesn't make any sense. You think the 1st Amendement stops the Supremacy Clause from outlawing supremacisms ? You think it doesn't do that ? What's the matter ? You don't understand English ? It says > This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND (Not Islam or its Sharia law)By refuting you mean completely ignored, yeah sure you refuted it.
But if you are using the actual definition then nowhere in your insane ramblings have you refuted it. You cannot deny first amendment protection. Period.
I most certainly CAN cannot deny first amendment protection, and most certainly do just that, when the first amendment activity is illegal and unconstitutional. You are trying to push a very weak argument, which I already thoroughly refuted earlier in the thread. You seem to have not read the earlier posts, or you wouldn't be making such foolish statements. As I said before, (since you're too lazy to read the earlier posts >>
The very weak 1st amendment has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
All you're doing here is adding to the stupidity of other posters who also tried to say the same thing you're saying now. You carry no weight here.
That's the really cool thing about Executive Orders. They can be implemented immediately while SCOTUS cases can take years to work their way up. It's how Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and FDR interned the Japanese... read some fucking history, ass munch.
I guess that I am a little surprised that Trump has not revealed a plan to make all Muslims wear a yellow badge on their clothes, and be required to live in a certain closed off section of town..
The US Supreme can and has issued injunctions to give the court time to hear a case. However, the more likely course would be a federal district court would enter an injunction which only take hours. Then schedule a hearing of the case. After the lower court ruled then it could go to the Supreme Court.There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.I don't know what you're even talking about. Doesn't make any sense. You think the 1st Amendement stops the Supremacy Clause from outlawing supremacisms ? You think it doesn't do that ? What's the matter ? You don't understand English ? It says > This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND (Not Islam or its Sharia law)By refuting you mean completely ignored, yeah sure you refuted it.
But if you are using the actual definition then nowhere in your insane ramblings have you refuted it. You cannot deny first amendment protection. Period.
I most certainly CAN cannot deny first amendment protection, and most certainly do just that, when the first amendment activity is illegal and unconstitutional. You are trying to push a very weak argument, which I already thoroughly refuted earlier in the thread. You seem to have not read the earlier posts, or you wouldn't be making such foolish statements. As I said before, (since you're too lazy to read the earlier posts >>
The very weak 1st amendment has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
All you're doing here is adding to the stupidity of other posters who also tried to say the same thing you're saying now. You carry no weight here.
That's the really cool thing about Executive Orders. They can be implemented immediately while SCOTUS cases can take years to work their way up. It's how Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and FDR interned the Japanese... read some fucking history, ass munch.
