CPAC 2004: ALAN KEYES' SPEECH

Renew America website ^ | January 24, 2004 | Dr. Alan Keyes

[tpaine]

--- with the clear understanding that the supremacy clause & the 14th both say the States are bound to honor the US Constitution & BOR's.

It is ludicrous to see a major political figure like Keyes claim that states are free violate our individual rights.
-tpaine-


______________________________________



What's ludicrous is your interpretation of the amendment.

"It was under a solemn consciousness of the dangers from ecclesiastical ambition, the bigotry of spiritual pride, and the intolerance of sects, thus exemplified in our domestic, as well as in foreign 'annals, that it was deemed advisable to exclude from the national government all power to act upon the subject. The situation, too, of the different states equally proclaimed the policy, as Well as the necessity of such an exclusion. . . . "
-Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution


Also from Story, same link, at #1866.

" -- The real difficulty lies in ascertaining the limits, to which government may righttnlly go in fostering and encouraging religion.
Three cases may easily be supposed.

One, where a government affords aid to a particular religion, leaving all persons free to adopt any other;
another, where it creates an ecclesiastical establishment for the propagation of the doctrines of a particular sect of that religion, leaving a like freedom to all others;
and a third, where it creates such an establishment, and excludes all persons, not belonging to it, either wholly, or in part, from any participation in the public honours, trusts, emoluments, privileges, and immunities of the state.

For instance, a government may simply declare, that the Christian religion shall be the religion of the state, and shall be aided, and encouraged in all the varieties of sects belonging to it;
or it may declare, that the Catholic or Protestant religion shall be the religion of the state, leaving every man to the free enjoyment of his own religious opinions;
or it may establish the doctrines of a particular sect, as of Episcopalians, as the religion of the state, with a like freedom;
or it may establish the doctrines of a particular sect, as exclusively the religion of the state, tolerating others to a limited extent, or excluding all, not belonging to it, from all public honours, trusts, emoluments, privileges, and immunities.

---

Story's comments, depending on how you read/emphasize and edit them, can 'back up' any most any conclusion you care to make.
The man was a real ratchet mouth..

Thanks for the link, -- in a way it proves my point more than yours.

[Djarum]

Story's comments, depending on how you read/emphasize and edit them, can 'back up' any most any conclusion you care to make.

He spends several paragraphs explaining why Congress was best restricted from involving itself in religion, what you quoted being an example of such. I quoted the conclusion, where arguments are typically summarized.

Do you have any historical evidence supporting your interpretation?

[dts32041]

BFL and mp3

[CAR913]

bump for later

[TigersEye]

Sorry, if the message is consistently received incorrectly, the problem lies with the messenger.

If that be true then God Almighty needs to take a communications course. 8^O

[TigersEye]

...it was deemed advisable to exclude from the national government all power to act upon the subject.

Except for the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals of course.

[tpaine]

-- the dangers from ecclesiastical ambition, the bigotry of spiritual pride, and the intolerance of sects, ---- it was deemed advisable to exclude from the national government all power to act upon the subject.

The situation, too, of the different states equally proclaimed the policy, as Well as the necessity of such an exclusion. . . . "
-Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution

______________________________________


TigersEye wrote: ...

Except for the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals of course.

---

Yep.. All of mans institutions are fallible.

You have a point?

[TigersEye]

My point is obvious. The 11th C.C. of Appeals, guided by Judge Myron Thompson, violated the 1st Amendment rights of Judge Moore.

[Bigun]

"What happens is, Keyes' points make RINOs restless. They don't have the ammunition or the intellectual capacity to address the points he makes, so they start in with the nitpicking about his delivery."

B I N G O ! ! !

I have had the good fortune to hear Dr. Keyes speak live on three seperate occasions and the reaction is ALWAYS the same! I think they consider him a threat. Come to think of it, they (the RINOS) are probably right in that regard.

[tpaine]

Judge Moore had no 'right' to put his monument in the courthouse..

Case Closed...

[Amelia]

If we end up with Kerry, oh well, what's the difference?

Is there a difference between President Bush and Senator Kerry?

Do you favor abortion on demand? Civil unions? Senator Kerry does.

[Amelia]

If that be true then God Almighty needs to take a communications course. 8^O

Cute.

[TBP]

BTTT.

[TigersEye]

Your logic either works or it doesn't.

[TigersEye]

Dream on.

[tpaine]

Thanks.. -- I dream of an america free of religious bigots in our court system..

I fear it's an impossible dream, but hey, --

[Amelia]

There's also the possibility that people understand the message and reject it - and you'll notice that Jesus said many people wouldn't be able to accept his message.

Or are you comparing Alan Keyes to God?

[TigersEye]

Or are you comparing Alan Keyes to God?

In the context of your statement yes. Providing that it is true that Alan Keyes message is received incorrectly, he has that in common with God, without a doubt.

There's also the possibility that people understand the message and reject it - ,

But that is not what you said so, naturally, my response did not address that POV.

[Amelia]

But that is not what you said so, naturally, my response did not address that POV.

Because that appears to be true with Alan Keyes - Alan Keyes appears to need to revise his delivery.

I'm not comparing Alan Keyes to God, and I think you are trying to muddy the waters by doing so.

[TigersEye]

As far as my comparison went it was wholly valid. As far as crafting a message that you won't reject; that appears to be beyond the pen of mortal man.