Posted on 09/15/2005 9:49:14 PM PDT by Coleus
The JFK Question
Sens. Specter and Feinstein impose an unconstitutional religious test.
BY MANUEL MIRANDA
Thursday, September 15, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
They should be ashamed. We should be ashamed. We have not progressed much in 45 years it seems, and we appear to be traveling in the wrong direction.
Article VI of the Constitution prohibits a religious test from being imposed on nominees to public office. The clause was motivated by the experience of Catholics in the Maryland colony and Baptists in Virginia who had been the targets of Great Britain's two Test Acts. These infamous laws of intolerance sought to prevent anyone who did not belong to the Church of England from holding public office. The Test Acts did not say that Catholics could not hold office; the bigotry was more subtle. Officials questioned would-be public servants to determine whether they believed in particular tenets of the Catholic faith.
While questioning John Roberts on Tuesday, Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter asked: "Would you say that your views are the same as those expressed by John Kennedy when he was a candidate, and he spoke to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association in September of 1960: 'I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me.' "
Hours later, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California made it worse: "In 1960, there was much debate about President John F. Kennedy's faith and what role Catholicism would play in his administration. At that time, he pledged to address the issues of conscience out of a focus on the national interests, not out of adherence to the dictates of one's religion. . . . My question is: Do you?"
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
As a Catholic, but more importantly, as an American, I found it deeply offensive that members of the United States Senate would try to enact a religious test for public office. Who do they think that they are? Englishman?
Article VI, Clause 3:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
'Nuff said.
What were the answers?
oops, SpectEr. So much for previewing!
Our Government officials unconstitutional? Nah, I don't belive it.
I wonder how Sens. Spector and Feinstein would react to being questioned whether they would put the interests of the United States over those of Israel. I can imagine their howels about anti-semitism.
We cannot have any Catholic holding any public office. The Pope is who the Catholics pledge homage too, not the USA. This Nation is being overrun by Catholics. We need to stop all immigration of these Catholics, they will ruin the nation. Catholics are bad.
[I]We cannot have any Catholic holding any public office. The Pope is who the Catholics pledge homage too, not the USA. This Nation is being overrun by Catholics. We need to stop all immigration of these Catholics, they will ruin the nation. Catholics are bad.[/I]
Yes - 2% of their priests are giving 100% of boy preying pedophiles a bad name!
Arlen Sphincter is an embarrassment to the Republican Party. :/
I thought you said the Amish were bad on that other thread. So who is worse? Catholics or the Quilt making Amish?
Yes, let's judge the whole population of Catholics by that two percent!
Ha! Read the tagline!
Tough Question. The Answer is that anyone who is Catholic is bad. or orthodox Jewish. or observant Protestant. Religion is bad bad bad.
Diane Feinstein displays her superb legal understanding. These gun-grabbing, whining, lying, mental patients are always coming around so concerned about their rights, but they don't give a damn about the basic rights plainly enumerated in the constitution. Since the fall of the Soviet Union the domestic Communists have been coming out of the woodwork.
This would be my response:
Yes I do, Senator Feinstein. I promise not to let JFK's religious faith influence my interpretation of the Constitution.
Why yes, actually, I think it is in this nation's best interest to institute Canon Law in place of the Constitution. And so what is my religion will be your religion soon enough. But only as it is in the best interest of the nation. Does that answer your question?
:crickets:
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.