What do these Dems have against god?

[Charles_Main]

I was under the impression our rights were granted by the Constitution.

the constitutiom's purpose is to limit the power of govt.

not really. it was to ensure the propagation of OUR government and it was to ensure individual liberties.... something our current court seems to forget.

Not Really? Are you kidding. Have you ever read it? Or any of the other writings of the people who wrote it. It most definitely was intended to limit Governments power. Limiting Governments power over the people is a cornerstone of our Constitution. Most of our rights which it insures us, as spelled out by saying. Congress shall make not law. It does not say you have the right to free speech. It says the Government does not have the right to abridge free speech. Etc Etc.

Clearly it was all about limiting the size, scope, and power of the Federal Government. Nearly ever single line of it.

 

[Jroc]

The declaration of independence has legal bearing in the USA?
or just the constitution?

I didn't say it did, I'm just pionting out that they weren't athiests

 

[uscitizen]

The declaration of independence has legal bearing in the USA?
or just the constitution?

I didn't say it did, I'm just pionting out that they weren't athiests

Yes, but the official document outlining our government is not religious.
Who on here said they were atheists? They were just smart enough to realize that govt and religion do not well mix. They had not forgotten Religious led England at this point.

 

[Liberty]

The declaration of independence has legal bearing in the USA?
or just the constitution?

the declaration is page 1 of the US code, so yes.

 

[sangha]

the constitutiom's purpose is to limit the power of govt.

not really. it was to ensure the propagation of OUR government and it was to ensure individual liberties.... something our current court seems to forget.

Not Really? Are you kidding. Have you ever read it? Or any of the other writings of the people who wrote it. It most definitely was intended to limit Governments power. Limiting Governments power over the people is a cornerstone of our Constitution. Most of our rights which it insures us, as spelled out by saying. Congress shall make not law. It does not say you have the right to free speech. It says the Government does not have the right to abridge free speech. Etc Etc.

Clearly it was all about limiting the size, scope, and power of the Federal Government. Nearly ever single line of it.

The Constitution says nothing about limiting the size, scope and power of the Fed govt. Here are the ONLY limits the Constitution places on Congress (from Art I, Sec 9)

Section 9 - Limits on Congress

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

(No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.) (Section in parentheses clarified by the 16th Amendment.)

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.

As you can see (or maybe not), the only limits on Congressional power relate to slavery, habeus corpus, bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, taxes, favoring ports, and titles of nobility.

 

[HUGGY]

:under g-d was inserted into the pledge during the mccarthy era to weed out 'commies'.

why do you care?


and why do idiots think dems have anything against g-d?



oh...and she's 30 points over her opponent and has been given a 100% chance of a win by fivethirtyeight.com

FiveThirtyEight House Election Forecasts and Polls - Election 2010 - The New York Times
October 26, 2010 -- McCollum Honors Pledge of Allegiance and ?One Nation Under God?

I care becouse part of the problem in Amerian society today is the attacks by the libs on the Judeo Christian moral values this country was founded on.. But I guess in the liberal mind thats all fine and dandy

Yeah, yeah yeah. Praise God, use His name a lot, hate 'em gays, preserve the fetus until he's out of the womb, then tell the mother to get a damn job and stop leeching off the taxpayers since we have corporations to feed. I read your "morals."

No. You are not on "The List".

 

[Sallow]

[And depending on what "pilgrims" you were referring to, there were many attempts to establish colonies in the United States, yeah..they were fleeing religious persecution.

Thank you

And there was quite a span of time between the settlements and the colonies. There probably weren't any "pilgrims" writing the Constitution..which doesn't include the word "god" by the way.

So I guess you know for a fact that none of the founders were descendents of these people right? Well... God is not in Constitution, but it is Dated this way..

"Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven".



Declaration of Independance



"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. "—

No where in the bible (at least to my knowledge) or the Torah are included any "rights". There are however, "recommendations" on how to treat other people, including slaves. What religion demands is "faith". And your reward comes after your death.

Well thats not exactly true...in Jewish teaching you don't even have to believe in God to be rewarded in the end, its is, as you said the way you treat other people, and the way you live you're life generally. If you're a good person you'll be fine

My overall point is that the foundation of what became the Constitution comes from many sources. "Christian-Judeo" values didn't really factor into it much. And yes you can point to religious quotes by many of the founders..but..they were scoring political points and trying to rally the masses. Politicians using religion for that purpose is nothing new..then or now.

 

[sangha]

[And depending on what "pilgrims" you were referring to, there were many attempts to establish colonies in the United States, yeah..they were fleeing religious persecution.

Thank you



So I guess you know for a fact that none of the founders were descendents of these people right? Well... God is not in Constitution, but it is Dated this way..

"Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven".



Declaration of Independance



"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. "—

No where in the bible (at least to my knowledge) or the Torah are included any "rights". There are however, "recommendations" on how to treat other people, including slaves. What religion demands is "faith". And your reward comes after your death.

Well thats not exactly true...in Jewish teaching you don't even have to believe in God to be rewarded in the end, its is, as you said the way you treat other people, and the way you live you're life generally. If you're a good person you'll be fine

My overall point is that the foundation of what became the Constitution comes from many sources. "Christian-Judeo" values didn't really factor into it much. And yes you can point to religious quotes by many of the founders..but..they were scoring political points and trying to rally the masses. Politicians using religion for that purpose is nothing new..then or now.

The I guess xtianity is the ideological cause of pedophilia because those child molesters quoted the Bible often when they preached to their congregations

 

[JBeukema]

The declaration of independence has legal bearing in the USA?
or just the constitution?

the declaration is page 1 of the US code, so yes.

United States Code: Title 1,CHAPTER 1—RULES OF CONSTRUCTION | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[JBeukema]

not really. it was to ensure the propagation of OUR government and it was to ensure individual liberties.... something our current court seems to forget.

Not Really? Are you kidding. Have you ever read it? Or any of the other writings of the people who wrote it. It most definitely was intended to limit Governments power. Limiting Governments power over the people is a cornerstone of our Constitution. Most of our rights which it insures us, as spelled out by saying. Congress shall make not law. It does not say you have the right to free speech. It says the Government does not have the right to abridge free speech. Etc Etc.

Clearly it was all about limiting the size, scope, and power of the Federal Government. Nearly ever single line of it.

The Constitution says nothing about limiting the size, scope and power of the Fed govt. Here are the ONLY limits the Constitution places on Congress (from Art I, Sec 9)

Section 9 - Limits on Congress

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

(No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.) (Section in parentheses clarified by the 16th Amendment.)

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.

As you can see (or maybe not), the only limits on Congressional power relate to slavery, habeus corpus, bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, taxes, favoring ports, and titles of nobility.

Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


retard

 

[uscitizen]

The declaration of independence has legal bearing in the USA?
or just the constitution?

the declaration is page 1 of the US code, so yes.

United States Code: Title 1,CHAPTER 1—RULES OF CONSTRUCTION | LII / Legal Information Institute

I pulled up that link and did not see the declaration of independence anywhere. That just seems to be a list of items passed by the congress.

 

[sangha]

Not Really? Are you kidding. Have you ever read it? Or any of the other writings of the people who wrote it. It most definitely was intended to limit Governments power. Limiting Governments power over the people is a cornerstone of our Constitution. Most of our rights which it insures us, as spelled out by saying. Congress shall make not law. It does not say you have the right to free speech. It says the Government does not have the right to abridge free speech. Etc Etc.

Clearly it was all about limiting the size, scope, and power of the Federal Government. Nearly ever single line of it.

The Constitution says nothing about limiting the size, scope and power of the Fed govt. Here are the ONLY limits the Constitution places on Congress (from Art I, Sec 9)

Section 9 - Limits on Congress

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

(No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.) (Section in parentheses clarified by the 16th Amendment.)

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.

As you can see (or maybe not), the only limits on Congressional power relate to slavery, habeus corpus, bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, taxes, favoring ports, and titles of nobility.

Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


retard

WIngnut thinks because one amendment mentions limiting a power, the Constitution "was all about limiting the size, scope, and power of the Federal Government"

In wingnut world, the constitution has only one amendment, and nothing else

 

[uscitizen]

Extremists always see what they want in documents, etc that they want to justify their position.

For instance I read freedom from religion in the constitution as well as freedom of religion.
Constitutional revisionism?

If we only take the constitution for exactly what it says we would have to do away with maybe 1/2 of our laws.

For example it says nothing directly about child abuse does it? So any laws passed on that are interpretations or laws made outside of the scope of the constiturion?

btw I have a relative that teaches constitutional law, we discuss such things from time to time.

 

[JBeukema]

the declaration is page 1 of the US code, so yes.

United States Code: Title 1,CHAPTER 1—RULES OF CONSTRUCTION | LII / Legal Information Institute

I pulled up that link and did not see the declaration of independence anywhere. That just seems to be a list of items passed by the congress.

Yeah... same here... Maybe he has a hard copy and it's printed on page i?

Or he could just be an idiot

 

[uscitizen]

I believe the second option more likely.

 

[JBeukema]

The Constitution says nothing about limiting the size, scope and power of the Fed govt. Here are the ONLY limits the Constitution places on Congress (from Art I, Sec 9)

As you can see (or maybe not), the only limits on Congressional power relate to slavery, habeus corpus, bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, taxes, favoring ports, and titles of nobility.

Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


retard

WIngnut thinks because one amendment mentions limiting a power, the Constitution "was all about limiting the size, scope, and power of the Federal Government"

In wingnut world, the constitution has only one amendment, and nothing else

Clearly, you're retarded

 

[uscitizen]

Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


retard

WIngnut thinks because one amendment mentions limiting a power, the Constitution "was all about limiting the size, scope, and power of the Federal Government"

In wingnut world, the constitution has only one amendment, and nothing else

Clearly, you're retarded

I think demented hits the spot better.

 

[sangha]

WIngnut thinks because one amendment mentions limiting a power, the Constitution "was all about limiting the size, scope, and power of the Federal Government"

In wingnut world, the constitution has only one amendment, and nothing else

Clearly, you're retarded

I think demented hits the spot better.

Idiot wingnuts think an amendment that says "the feds power is limited to the feds power" is a limit on fed power.

From your own wiki link

In United States v. Sprague (1931) the Supreme Court noted that the amendment "added nothing to the [Constitution] as originally ratified."

In wingnut world, the Constitution, which is where all govt power comes from, was ALL about limiting fed power.

 

[Intense]

Hmmmm..... 17 references to Tyranny in the Federalist Papers.

Tyranny - Google Search

 

[JBeukema]

Clearly, you're retarded

I think demented hits the spot better.

Idiot wingnuts think an amendment that says "the feds power is limited to the feds power" is a limit on fed power.

From your own wiki link

In United States v. Sprague (1931) the Supreme Court noted that the amendment "added nothing to the [Constitution] as originally ratified."

In wingnut world, the Constitution, which is where all govt power comes from, was ALL about limiting fed power.

SCOTUS serves the ends of the politicians who get them appointed.


According to Jefferson, SCOTUS can go fuck itself; what some old prick says he thinks an older prick means means jack shit. Only one thing matters: the will of the nation.