Posted on 04/11/2014 2:02:24 PM PDT by Olog-hai
Lawmakers are moving ahead with a proposal to name the Bible as Louisianas official state book, despite concerns the bill would land the Legislature in court.
A House municipal committee advanced the bill Thursday with an 8-5 vote, sending it to the full House for debate.
Rep. Thomas Carmody, R-Shreveport, said he sponsored the proposal after a constituent made the request. But Carmody insisted the bill wasn't designed to be a state-endorsement of Christianity or a specific religion.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Enter the A.C.L.U.
Oooooh, that’ll make ‘em screech.
>>Oooooh, thatll make em screech.<<
And will cost the citizens of LA a TON of money in what is a symbolic gesture.
I appreciate what they are trying to say and do but still...
And they'll quickly and easily win while the State wastes taxpayer funds defending legislation that any 7th grader knows is unconstitutional.
Yup. And those ACLU commie f*cks will insist that the book be “Dreams of my Father” by Buttcrack Odumbo.
The official state book? Do states have official books?
And this really isn’t establishing anything. No different to having state flowers and such.
Oh the huge manatees...
Money in what? Lawsuits?
If we cower before the Left because of the cost, we deserve to lose.
They once had official state religions! Perfectly Constitutional, as long as the state constitution allowed it.
But states have slowly become wards of the federal government. That's the problem.
WARNING! WARNING! RED-HEADED STEP-CHILD CHANNELING!!
Louisiana is a state that continues to amaze me. First, with the level in intellect of ‘some’ of the constituents, in certain areas. Second, with the “Hedley Lamarr” State legislator scheming buzzards that think the constituents might not notice what went down, until it is all over. Third, with all the things that they really have to work on, they spend their time on “the o-fish-al book of Louisiana”.
Amos and Andy might have chosen a better subject!!!
I can believe that this got started by somebody, who had once heard a Cajun traveling preacher, (before he went to tv), talk about somebody he ran into: “I’m cat’lic, my wife is cat’lic, my kids ‘r’ cat’lic, and my dog is cat’lic, too.”
So, ok, the bible is ‘dah book of dah state’.
HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PROVE OWNERSHIP?
HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PROVE COPYRIGHT OWNERSHIP?
HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PROVE IT WAS ACTUALLY WRITTEN BY A
‘LOUISIANAN’?
I would rather see a book by Faulkner, whose little place just off Jackson Square in New Orleans, WAS there before Katrina - haven’t a clue now.
Or a book by Audobon.
Lastly, if the bible was suggested by some constituent in the state, I’m sure another one suggested the authorized story of that ex-con Edwin Edwards, too. Or, Boudreaux and Thibideaux. At least the last one, has some laughs and giggles.
Regardless what FDR's activist justices want everybody to believe about Thomas Jefferson's "wall of separation," the real Jefferson had actually noted the following. The Founding States had made the 10th Amendment in part to clarify that the states had reserved government power to legislatively address religious issues uniquely to themselves, regardless that the Founders had also made the 1st Amendment to prohibit Congress from having such powers.
3. Resolved that it is true as a general principle and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the constitution that the powers not delegated to the US. by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively or to the people: and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the US. by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, & were reserved, to the states or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated rather than the use be destroyed (emphasis added); Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions, 1798.
Other than not reading the Constitution and its history for themselves, the reason that citizens have fallen into the trap of thinking that the states have no constitutional authority to legislatively address religious issues is the following. Regardless that the 14th Amendment clearly applies only the Constitution's privileges and immunities to the states, FDR's activist justices wrongly argued that it also applied the 1st Amendment's prohibition of specific federal government powers to the states. This is evidenced by the following excerpt from the Cantwell v. Connecticut opinion.
The First Amendment declares that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The Fourteenth Amendment has rendered the legislatures of the states as incompetent as Congress to enact such laws (emphasis added). The constitutional inhibition of legislation on the subject of religion has a double aspect. Mr. Justice Roberts, Cantwell v. State of Connecticut, 1940.But not only did FDR's puppet justices wrongly ignore Jefferson's words about state power to address religious issues, they also wrongly ignored that John Bingham, the main author of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, had officially clarified that the 14th Amendment took away no state powers.
The adoption of the proposed amendment will take from the States no rights (emphasis added) that belong to the States. John Bingham, Appendix to the Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of first column)
No right (emphasis added) reserved by the Constitution to the States should be impaired John Bingham, Appendix to the Congressional Globe. (See top half of 1st column)
Do gentlemen say that by so legislating we would strike down the rights of the State? God forbid. I believe our dual system of government essential to our national existance. John Bingham, Appendix to the Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of third column)
So based on both Jefferson's and Bingham's words, the states still have government power to address religious issues, including making the Bible the official state book imo, regardless what anti-religious expression judges tell us about church and state separation.
That’s interesting. From the perspective of religion yes that’ll really be interesting but as a purely historical record it’s unparalleled.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.