Replies

I didn't say the 1st amendment didn't apply to the states,

Sorry I misunderstood your comment #226:

The 1st amendment says "Congress shall make no law..." Does a county courthouse = Congress? Does the 10 commandments = "making law"? huh?

and your comment #245:

REad it again: Congress (not judiciary) shall make no law... Repeat that over and over until you get it thru your head that judges CANNOT MAKE LAWS. Only Congress can establish a religion. Get it? A courthouse in backwater county is not Congress or a State legislature.

I just wanted to clarify that both Scalia and Rehnquist consider "an obtrusive year-round religious display" a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, even though there is no "Congress" or "law" involved in such displays.

My statements were clearly aimed at the reinterpretation of the 1st amendment by bad judges. How much more clear could I make it?

I just wanted to clarify that both Scalia and Rehnquist consider "an obtrusive year-round religious display" a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, even though there is no "Congress" or "law" involved in such displays.

Then, they would be wrong too. The wording is plain. Only Congress can establish a religion (or legislature). A judge can't and neither can the Boy Scouts or a Christian that wants to make religious expression in his valdictory speech without being threatened with 6 months in jail!! Tyranny is what that is and these judges must be defied by the masses. When 20-30 million people start devying the horrible rulings of SCOTUS, they will be powerless to do anything about it, except shut up.

That's what the US Supreme Court has said. The Fourteenth Amendment incorporated the First Amendment to the states.
-George Wythe-

"But that's not what the 1st amendment clearly says --"
-ex-

The state governments have always been bound by the provisions of the bill of rights. Article VI makes this position clear in the supremacy clause.

During the fight over slavery, states rightists used the 1st amendments restriction on Congress as a talking point to get an erroneous USSC 'ruling' that amendments A1 thru A8 did not apply to states.

This is ludicrous on its face because at the same time in history states were being formed from territories [wherein the feds enforced our BOR's]'

--- Areas which when granted statehood citizens would have LOST the BOR's protection unless it was reiterated in the new states constitution..

Thus, because California omitted a 2nd amendment type RKBA's clause in 1848, its new residents suddenly lost the right to own guns? Ridiculous.

Bet me that this was original intent of the framers..