[Qwinn]

Oh dear Lord. Are you actually linking CFR to the decades old abuse of the Establishment Clause?

I'm a very anti-secular agnostic who believes that the Establishment clause has been utterly distorted and is being used to oppress religion. And I can acknowledge that I have concerns with CFR, although I don't just automatically swallow the "money = speech" mantra either.

But to claim CFR has -anything- to do with "separation of church and state" beyond their both being filed under the same numerical digit in the Bill of Rights is just tin-foil alert lunacy.

Qwinn

[CSM]

Is not the 1st ammendment one ammendment and one ammendment only. Any attack on any ammendment is an attack on the constitution. Any attack on any single ammendment is an attack on that ENTIRE ammendment. CFR is a law that specifically prohibits freedom of speech at specific times of an election cycle. If that speech can be prohibited by law, what other speech is free? The specific reason we have for the 1st is for the ability to speak about political views that may not be in agreement with the government. Now, that speech is restricted.

Add to that the activist court rulings that changed the "freedom of religion" to "freedom from religion" and we no longer have freedom of speech.

The courts have caused considerable harm and the first legislation signed into law was done so by our very own GWB. Double edged attack from both sides of the aisle. We will reaping the same affects soon and we have incrementally allowed it to happen.

If you can't understand that, then keep looking through your rose colored glasses with blinders on the sides.